No single individual, institution, or action is to blame for this.
The BJP is responding in kind -- definitely not without checking with its government. And they wait for Mr Trump, notes Shekhar Gupta.
A most important event in our politico-strategic history passed with somewhat less debate than it deserved.
It was the Bharatiya Janata Party's attack not merely on the 'deep state', now seen as a formidable, undefinable, and mysterious pan-national demon, but also on the US State Department.
When the BJP's official Twitter (sorry, Elon, X) handle posted a 16-part thread attacking the US deep state for launching an all-out war on India and its Modi government, you might have normally been inclined to say, 'It's OK. Trump is the new President. He's railing against the same monster. So, it's just as well that the BJP also joins in. Be on the winning side.'
Except, the 13th of these posts went beyond the deep state and accused the US State Department of leading this conspiratorial cabal.
The key lines: 'It has always been the US State Department behind this agenda... The deep state had a clear objective to destabilise India by targeting Prime Minister Modi... the French investigative media group Mediapart revealed that OCCRP is funded by the US State Department's USAID... In fact, 50 per cent of OCCRP's funding comes from the US State Department.'
There are specific mentions of the Pegasus controversy, several exposes on the Adani Group, and also references to other 'deep state' figures like George Soros.
The substantively new thing here was the BJP launching a direct and unqualified attack on the US State Department.
Please note that Mediapart is also the hard-left French platform that led the investigations into the Rafale deal, providing the Congress and Modi critics with much ammunition to attack him.
So far, for the BJP, it might have been part of some French left deep-state plot to undermine India and the Modi government.
Now, it's a credible ally. That irony just died isn't a phrase that works in hard politics.
Here, irony dies and resurrects, just like the serial storyteller of Vikram aur Betaal.
In this latest avatar, Betaal Mediapart's story was actually quite damaging to the US establishment.
It isn't just too clever by half, but also cynical in the extreme to be funding (without disclosure) investigative journalism across the world while simultaneously holding a veto over appointments of key personnel and issues, as revealed by Mediapart.
Cynicism, however, must be a core requirement for becoming a superpower.
Equally, a political party was within its rights to question it, if it felt its government was hurt by this US government-funded initiative.
Complications, however, arise at a more substantive level. It isn't the first time a ruling party in India has attacked the "foreign hand" or specifically the US.
The Congress did so routinely in the Indira era.
In the early 1970s, as Mrs Gandhi came under pressure from the Opposition, she and her party routinely accused their opponents of being CIA agents.
It was then that Rajya Sabha member Piloo Mody, who had been a founding member of the Swatantra Party, walked into the House one day wearing a badge saying, 'I am a CIA agent'.
Later, Rajiv Gandhi and even P V Narasimha Rao routinely attacked America when under pressure.
Rajiv with his 'naani yad kara denge' ('we will make them remember their grandmothers'), and Rao in a parliamentary intervention.
Sidelight: Later, the ministry of external affairs tried explaining this to the US embassy by dismissing it as a slip of the tongue.
In a conversation with some of us editors, a furious William Clarke, Jr, the US ambassador at the time, asked, "Was his tongue slipping for 15 minutes?"
So far, so good, but those times were different. This was India's Cold War anti-Americanism.
Now, we live in a different era, when three successive Indian prime ministers and five US Presidents have hailed ours as the most consequential bilateral relationship of the 21st Century.
India and America see each other as strategic partners if not allies. Some lines spoken during Mr Modi's official State visit to Washington in 2023 are relevant here.
Mr Modi said, 'Our... important decisions have added a new chapter to our comprehensive and global strategic partnership.' Joe Biden had described this as 'a partnership that is among the most consequential in the world, that is stronger, closer and more dynamic than any time in history.' And this, from the 6,500-word joint statement, was the cherry on the cake: 'No corner of human enterprise is untouched by the partnership between our two great countries, which spans the seas to the stars.'
This gives context to the BJP's attack on the US State Department now. Of course, diplomatically, both sides maintain at the highest levels there's no problem with the relationship.
So, how do two great powers, who mutually and repeatedly hail each other as vital strategic partners, reconcile this contradiction?.
That the Congress party has now latched onto this by accusing the Modi government of ruining a vital strategic relationship to 'protect his friend Adani' is just another irony in this season of contradictions, given its traditional anti-Americanism, which Manmohan Singh had to defy for that epochal nuclear deal.
It's the Opposition's job to prey on the government's contradictions. But how does the government balance this without sacrificing a relationship it says it values?.
The answer won't be as simple as saying the party has its view and the government will keep doing its thing.
India and America may have become friends, but anti-Americanism has always survived in popular opinion.
Lately, it's been turbo-charged with Mr Trump railing against his deep state, its many 'conspiracies', and woven into it the curious new appeal of the idea of de-dollarisation, something S Jaishankar has tried to squash unambiguously more than once.
So strong is our anti-Americanism that so many smart and influential people are seduced by the idea of a BRICS currency, never mind if it will be just another name for the Chinese Yuan.
It goes without saying that anti-Americanism is probably the safest ideology to flaunt.
Doubts and disputes will arise in the closest partnerships. As Mr Biden winds up, each side thinks it caught the other with their hands in the cookie jar.
The US on the Pannun issue and India now paying back on OCCRP.
How can you do such a thing to a friend?
That's the question each is asking the other.
Could the Modi government/BJP have handled it differently? Would they have spoken differently if Kamala Harris had won? You can speculate.
My point would instead be, has the US handled this much better?
See some of the statements of Ambassador Eric Garcetti.
Was it really necessary -- or diplomatic -- for him to talk of the 'red lines' on the Pannun issue when India was already responding to it very differently than to Nijjar-Canada?
Or his statement that the US made a distinction between talk and acts of terrorism.
His country knows as well as ours how terror talk can turn into action.
These were among the most insensitive words spoken in India by a US Ambassador in three decades.
We acknowledge that his Bollywood dancing moves are way better than the bhangra we saw from Justin Trudeau even if their costumes seemed tailored by the same guy in Palika Bazaar.
Dancing to Bollywood music or dholak is no way to win the hearts and minds of Indians in the 21st century, especially not when you are schooling them on the 'difference' between terror talk and action.
No single individual, institution, or action is to blame for this, but the relationship has entered a stressful phase in the final months of the Biden administration.
The BJP, I'd guess, is responding in kind -- definitely not without checking with its government. And they wait for Mr Trump.
By special arrangement with The Print
Feature Presentation: Aslam Hunani/Rediff.com
