INDIA
19 August 2025
The disappointing Narendra Modi
Narendra Modi is more of a performer than a serious political leader.
Bharat Karnad, a conservative political scientist, offers a very critical analysis of the first four-year term of the government of Narendra Modi in his book, Staggering Forward: Narendra Modi & India's Global Ambition, published in 2018. Though seven years old, this is still highly relevant to India today.
Karnad had very high hopes when Narendra Modi was elected and came to power in 2014. But he was then very disappointed. Mody has failed to deliver except in terms of rhetoric and imagery of success.
Mody invited all South Asian leaders to his inauguration. Everybody thought that this was a new beginning for South Asia. But this turned out not to be the case. Modi has ended up alienating his neighbours.
According to Karnad, Modu is one of a number of “strong men”, “alpha males”, who came to power around the same time. People like Donald Trump, Turkey’s Erdogan, Russia’s Putin, China’s Xi Jinping and Japan’s Abe. These leaders polarise their societies and some also use religion to advance themselves politically. Modi's discrimination against Muslims is perhaps the most egregious example.
Modi would be narcissist, paranoid, autocratic and active-aggressive, writes Karnad. Modi is extremely hierarchical – a culture he grew up in and experienced in the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), an Indian right-wing Hindutva volunteer paramilitary organisation. The US even revealed that they played on Modi’s vanity through back-slapping etc.
The RSS experience has shaped his method of governance. Since he has reached the top, everyone must defer to him. Modi is this the sole fount of policy ideas. He believes that he is his own think tank despite his spotty education. He doesn’t want ideas and proposals from other people. But in reality, his own knowledge is rather limited.
One major problem is that Modi has sidelined and undermined the bureaucracy in this country which is fundamentally a bureaucratic state. This means that the implementers of his agenda are working against him because they have no stake in it. The Indian bureaucracy knows how to slow things down, to run rings around you, and to leak stuff – and above all it works in close collusion with the US.
Modi usually gives other world leaders a bearhug when he meets them. He had the impression that he had secured Donald Trump’s friendship. He is always trying to curry favour with the Americans. But in reality Trump gave him nothing as he maintained restrictions on H-1B migrant visas, and implemented tariffs on Indian steel, aluminum and light manufactures. Strangely, Modi did not react with counter tariffs, unlike European countries.
Modi loves America, despite Washington’s refusal to give him a visa to visit the US in 2005 because in 2002 he allegedly did little to prevent the deaths that occurred during riots between Hindus and Muslims in the state of Gujarat of which he was Governor. He believes that being close to the very successful US will inspire India on the same path.
Karnad believes that the pro-American bias in foreign policy making is fostered by the multitude of US think tanks which now have branches in Delhi and are financed by large Indian enterprises.
But the US is on the other side of the globe, with different interests, and the close relationship means that India’s foreign policy can serve the US more than India. One case in point is that of Iran, America’s nemesis. By contrast, India has traditional historic links with Iran that go back centuries.
Karnad believes that Indian foreign policy has been too fixated on Pakistan to the detriment of its own strategic calculus. In reality, Pakistan is not a military threat. China is the threat. India has far too much military resources concentrated on the Pakistan border. Karnad believes that India should remove all weapons from the Pakistan border as a peace gesture. He believes that Pakistan is eminently “co-optable”.
Karnad argues that India would be much better off playing the role of leader in the greater South Asia context, rather than being co-opted by the United States. India’s deep irony is that it has very shallow economic relations with its neighbours, and generally poor political relations.
He also argues for countries like India, groupings like the BRICS or the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue are of limited value. They tend to be dominated by China and the US, each grouping’s political leader respectively.
Overall, despite Modi’s brouhaha, most of his foreign policies are a continuation of those of previous governments. He has brought no new national vision. It is time to reexamine for example India's nuclear doctrine of "No First Use", meaning India will only use nuclear weapons in retaliation against a nuclear attack on Indian territory or Indian forces. A key aspect of this doctrine is the commitment not to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapon states.
On the home front India needs to create lots of jobs, perhaps 15 million a year, for the youthful population bursting onto the labour market, but it’s not coming anywhere close. India has always been a laggard, and is suffering from not having caught the globalisation wave in the 1990s. Today, India needs to improve education in particular to foster job growth. Youth unemployment is a risk for social instability, as they may be tempted to join radical Hindu fringe groups to terrorise society.
Karnad had very high hopes when Narendra Modi was elected and came to power in 2014. But he was then very disappointed. Mody has failed to deliver except in terms of rhetoric and imagery of success.
Mody invited all South Asian leaders to his inauguration. Everybody thought that this was a new beginning for South Asia. But this turned out not to be the case. Modi has ended up alienating his neighbours.
According to Karnad, Modu is one of a number of “strong men”, “alpha males”, who came to power around the same time. People like Donald Trump, Turkey’s Erdogan, Russia’s Putin, China’s Xi Jinping and Japan’s Abe. These leaders polarise their societies and some also use religion to advance themselves politically. Modi's discrimination against Muslims is perhaps the most egregious example.
Modi would be narcissist, paranoid, autocratic and active-aggressive, writes Karnad. Modi is extremely hierarchical – a culture he grew up in and experienced in the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), an Indian right-wing Hindutva volunteer paramilitary organisation. The US even revealed that they played on Modi’s vanity through back-slapping etc.
The RSS experience has shaped his method of governance. Since he has reached the top, everyone must defer to him. Modi is this the sole fount of policy ideas. He believes that he is his own think tank despite his spotty education. He doesn’t want ideas and proposals from other people. But in reality, his own knowledge is rather limited.
One major problem is that Modi has sidelined and undermined the bureaucracy in this country which is fundamentally a bureaucratic state. This means that the implementers of his agenda are working against him because they have no stake in it. The Indian bureaucracy knows how to slow things down, to run rings around you, and to leak stuff – and above all it works in close collusion with the US.
Modi usually gives other world leaders a bearhug when he meets them. He had the impression that he had secured Donald Trump’s friendship. He is always trying to curry favour with the Americans. But in reality Trump gave him nothing as he maintained restrictions on H-1B migrant visas, and implemented tariffs on Indian steel, aluminum and light manufactures. Strangely, Modi did not react with counter tariffs, unlike European countries.
Modi loves America, despite Washington’s refusal to give him a visa to visit the US in 2005 because in 2002 he allegedly did little to prevent the deaths that occurred during riots between Hindus and Muslims in the state of Gujarat of which he was Governor. He believes that being close to the very successful US will inspire India on the same path.
Karnad believes that the pro-American bias in foreign policy making is fostered by the multitude of US think tanks which now have branches in Delhi and are financed by large Indian enterprises.
But the US is on the other side of the globe, with different interests, and the close relationship means that India’s foreign policy can serve the US more than India. One case in point is that of Iran, America’s nemesis. By contrast, India has traditional historic links with Iran that go back centuries.
Karnad believes that Indian foreign policy has been too fixated on Pakistan to the detriment of its own strategic calculus. In reality, Pakistan is not a military threat. China is the threat. India has far too much military resources concentrated on the Pakistan border. Karnad believes that India should remove all weapons from the Pakistan border as a peace gesture. He believes that Pakistan is eminently “co-optable”.
Karnad argues that India would be much better off playing the role of leader in the greater South Asia context, rather than being co-opted by the United States. India’s deep irony is that it has very shallow economic relations with its neighbours, and generally poor political relations.
He also argues for countries like India, groupings like the BRICS or the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue are of limited value. They tend to be dominated by China and the US, each grouping’s political leader respectively.
Overall, despite Modi’s brouhaha, most of his foreign policies are a continuation of those of previous governments. He has brought no new national vision. It is time to reexamine for example India's nuclear doctrine of "No First Use", meaning India will only use nuclear weapons in retaliation against a nuclear attack on Indian territory or Indian forces. A key aspect of this doctrine is the commitment not to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapon states.
On the home front India needs to create lots of jobs, perhaps 15 million a year, for the youthful population bursting onto the labour market, but it’s not coming anywhere close. India has always been a laggard, and is suffering from not having caught the globalisation wave in the 1990s. Today, India needs to improve education in particular to foster job growth. Youth unemployment is a risk for social instability, as they may be tempted to join radical Hindu fringe groups to terrorise society.