TheJaggi

This is the way the world ends  This is the way the world ends  This is the way the world ends  Not with a bang but a whimper. - TS Eliot in his poem, The Hollow Men The world may, at some point, end either in a bang or a whimper, or not end at all if wisdom prevails, but if one were to substitute the word “world” with “imperialism”, it would be perfect. All imperialisms, whether of the Spanish, Dutch, Portuguese, British, Arab or Persian kinds, have always ended in a whimper for one simple reason: the imperial powers don’t understand the limits of their own power. They die not because they lacked power, but because they thought their powers were endless. And, of course, they also arrogantly presumed that they were too big to fail. What we have been seeing in slow motion, starting from the fall of the Berlin Wall to 9/11 to the 2008 global financial crisis to the ongoing Iran war, is the steady decline of America power (after a brief rise), thanks to imperial over...

The Ukraine and Iran wars have given military strategists everywhere reason to re-examine their war doctrines. The fact that Russia, despite being a military superpower, has not been able to get the Ukrainians to play dead, and the fact that Iran has not only held its own against the joint might of the US and Israel, but is now also fighting back effectively, tells us why. Before we discuss which doctrines might really have to change, let us first examine the primary reason why Israel and the US went to war with Iran for the second time in less than a year: to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Is the cost to the world from the resulting disruptions worth this attempt to set Iran back in its hunt for nuclear weapons? The assumption is that if Iran has nukes, it can focus on the obliteration of Israel. But history tells us that the proliferation of nuclear weapons does not automatically result in their deployment during wars. It has never been deployed since the Americans...

Is the Indian judiciary inadvertently supporting crypto-Christianity, where a convert to Christianity remains Hindu on paper in order to benefit from the various affirmative action programmes of the government? A recent judgment of the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court, comprising Justices Mukulika Jawalkar and Nandesh Deshpande, ruled that the mere presence of a Jesus statue or the symbol of the cross at someone’s home cannot be seen as proof of conversion to Christianity. In a sense this is true, since Hindus often have no objection to venerating the sacred symbols of other religions. But if the burden of proof of conversion to Christianity is going to be set higher, it implies that the authorities need to be more intrusive in their investigations. Since this is not possible in every instance of suspected conversion, crypto Christians can get a free ride and the best of both worlds: the benefits offered by their new faith, and the compensations offered by the faith they clai...

The US deputy secretary of state Christopher Landau made what many would have called a particularly revealing, and yet insensitive, comment on how the US sees partnership with India. After waxing eloquent on how this century is going to see the rise of India, and how it is both in America’s and India’s interest to partner for a win-win result, he blew it at the Raisina Dialogue on 5 March by saying: “But again, India should understand that we are not going to make the same mistakes with India that we made with China 20 years ago in terms of saying, we are going to let you develop all these markets, and then, the next thing we know, you are beating us in a lot of commercial things. We are going to make sure that whatever we do is fair to our people. Because ultimately, we have to be accountable to our own people, just as the Government of India has to be accountable to its people.” The question is: what exactly did Landau mean when he said that the US is “ not going to make the sam...

India has been criticised, especially by the minority vote-dependent opposition parties and the Congress, for its muted response to the Israel-US attack on Iran. Some observers have wondered if we have picked sides in a war that will impact the Indian economy as much as the rest of the world. Sonia Gandhi has been particularly vocal in her critique of the government’s silence. A close reading of the official statements made by India’s ministry of external affairs (MEA), the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN), the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, and Turkiye suggests that our reticence is not exactly an outlier. India’s initial statement , made on 28 February, has since been overtaken by events, with External Affairs Secretary, Vikram Misri, signing a condolence register at the Iranian embassy in Delhi. The initial statement was anodyne. It read: “India is deeply concerned at the recent developments in Iran and the Gulf region. We urge all sides to exercise restrain...

The Tata Sons board decided on Tuesday (24 February 2026) to defer a decision on giving its executive chairman N Chandrasekaran an extension . The move was precipitated by Noel Tata, Chairman of the Tata Trusts which own a majority of shares in Tata Sons. He asked Chandrasekaran some tough questions on losses in several parts of the conglomerate. Among other things, Noel Tata wanted Chandrasekaran’s extension to depend on the latter giving the board assurances on how he plans to tackle a few key challenges. Among these: stemming losses at Air India and Tata Digital: protecting cash at Tata Sons by monitoring spends in the semiconductor and batteries businesses; maintaining Tata Sons’ unlisted status (the RBI wants it to list, given its size); and finding a way to give the Shapoorji Pallonji (SP) group an exit from Tata Sons. The SP group owns 18.37 percent is Tata Sons, and is the single biggest shareholder after the Tata Trusts. The group also wants to use funds currently locked up ...