Latest news with #SOAS
Daily Mail
22-07-2025
- Entertainment
- Daily Mail
University Challenge question leaves every single BBC contestant stumped - but can YOU defy the odds and solve it?
A University Challenge question left every single contestant baffled as they struggled to correctly guess the answer on Monday night. The beloved BBC show, which is presented by Amol Rajan, returned for a brand new run of episodes. Kicking off this week, it was UCL v SOAS as the two universities battled it out to progress to the next round. However, one question Amol, 42, put to the students left them dumfounded as they tried to give the presenter an answer. Amol asked them: 'In what present-day country was a territory that was given the name 'Island of the True Cross' by Pedro Álvares Cabral during a trading expedition to India in 1500? 'Perhaps attempting to avoid becalm waters in the Gulf of Guinea, Cabral sailed south-west under the terms of the Treaty of Tordesillas, claimed the place for the Crown of Portugal.' Kicking off this week, it was UCL v SOAS as the two universities battled it out to progress to the next round by putting their best students forward UCL tried their best to answer, with Doherty blurring out 'Goa,' but Amol told him it was incorrect. Mozayen then had a go, simply saying: 'Sri Lanka?' but was promptly told that also wasn't correct. Have you managed to correctly guess the answer? The answer was in fact Brazil. Meanwhile, BBC viewers were recently reduced to tears as University Challenge host Amol Rajan sobbed over a bereavement 'too painful to think about' in an emotional new documentary. Amol Rajan Goes To The Ganges, released on BBC One last month, followed the journalist and broadcaster on a life-changing trip to his birth country of India. The hour-long documentary came after the British-Indian presenter lost his father three years ago and struggled to come to terms with it. Amol did not take his emotional journey alone - his mother accompanied him and provided a steadying presence throughout its ups and downs. He noticed on the trip his mother, a practising Hindu, 'seemed to have an emotional toolkit that I lacked'. Amol was touched by fans' admiration of his mother, posting on X during the broadcast: 'If you're one of the thousands of people watching this on BBC One and thinking my mum is a legend, I confirm you are absolutely correct.' To a suggestion she do the famous Thought For The Day segment on Radio 4's Today programme, which he hosts, he replied: 'My mum is the most extraordinary person. She'd be fantastic.'
The Diplomat
14-07-2025
- Politics
- The Diplomat
Hindu Nationalism in the Indian Diaspora: An Interview with Dr. Edward Anderson
This is the transcript of an interview conducted for the July episode of 'Beyond the Indus,' The Diplomat's South Asia-focused podcast. Tushar Shetty (Interviewer): We're pleased to be joined by Dr. Edward Anderson, Senior Fellow at SOAS* and Assistant Professor at Northumbria University*. His research focuses on the Indian diaspora, transnational politics, Hindutva, and Hindu nationalism, as well as British histories of migration, ethnicity, and multiculturalism. His latest book, Hindu Nationalism in the Indian Diaspora, is a fascinating deep dive into these topics, charting the origin and evolution of Hindutva in the British Indian diaspora and examining the organizational aspects of Hindutva-leaning groups. Edward, welcome to Beyond the Indus, and thank you for joining the podcast. Edward Anderson: Thank you so much. It's lovely to talk to you. Tushar Shetty: Edward, I was reading your book on Hindu nationalism and the Indian diaspora, and what I found interesting was that it begins in an unusual place—not in India or the UK, but rather in Nairobi, Kenya, where the RSS actually set up its first overseas shakha* (branch) before India was even an independent country. Could you take us through the origins of transnational Hindutva in East Africa and how it spread to the UK and internationally? Edward Anderson: You're absolutely right. Hindu nationalism outside of India first established itself through the Sangh* in East Africa, specifically in Kenya. It's worth providing some historical context to explain how this happened. While Hindutva only became politically powerful toward the end of the 20th century and into the 21st century, Hindu nationalism and Hindutva ideology have origins that go much earlier—to the early 20th century or even the late 19th century in some ways. As for why it established itself in East Africa, there had been, since the end of the 19th century and early 20th century onward, a substantial population of Indian people in East Africa. East Africa at this time was part of the British Empire—the countries I'm talking about are mainly Kenya, Uganda, and Tanzania. These parts of East Africa started to see growth in Indian communities, partly as a response to the British colonial state encouraging Indians to move over to work in various parts of the economy. Initially, they were brought over to help construct the Uganda Railway, bringing laborers and skilled workers from India. They were also given certain rights to set up businesses and trading rights, many of which were denied to the local African population. Some people were given positions within the colonial bureaucracy as well. From the outset, the Asian population of East Africa had a relatively privileged position in society and a segregated position as well. They kept to themselves, had their own communities, and lived in particular parts of towns—often parts that had been allocated to them by the British. They maintained quite a close connection with the homeland, with India, which was a short hop over the ocean. The east of Africa and the west of India have been connected via maritime trading routes for hundreds of years. In the mid-1940s, there's a legendary story of a fellow moving over to work in a school who was an RSS member in India. When he arrived in Kenya, he established the first shakhas*, the first branches of the RSS—the leading and most powerful Hindu nationalist organization. He set up the first shakha*, and from that point onward, it became quite popular. Many children were sent there by their parents as a place to socialize with other people from the same community and to learn about Hindu culture and Indian culture in various ways, developing a sense of cultural pride and assertiveness. From that point onward, it started to establish itself through branches of the Sangh* that were set up in other parts of the world. In the historical narrative, during the 1960s and 1970s, after the African countries I mentioned started gaining independence, they were keen to coerce, persuade, or even expel the Asian population in East Africa. Most famously and notoriously, there was Idi Amin's* expulsion of the Asians in 1972. At this point, many East African Asians moved to Britain—often they had British passports by virtue of being citizens of the British Empire—and to other places as well. This is when we start to see the real establishment of Hindu nationalist organizations in the UK, around the exact time when East African Asians were moving over in the 1960s. Tushar Shetty: That community of East African Indians has produced many interesting people who have ascended quite high in both UK and US politics. I believe Kash Patel* and Zoran Mamdani*, who is the mayor incumbent* of New York City, Priti Patel*, who was former Home Secretary in the UK—is Rishi Sunak* part of that East African Indian diaspora as well? Edward Anderson: Yes, you're absolutely right. This is a community that has produced incredibly interesting and successful people in all sorts of areas, and as you've identified, from all parts of the political spectrum as well. In the UK, Rishi Sunak*, the first non-white Prime Minister of the UK and leader of the Conservative Party, and also two subsequent Home Secretaries, Priti Patel* and then Suella Braverman*—all of these people have roots in East Africa. Tushar Shetty: This is a pretty well-educated, well-established community that also brought some Hindutva ideas to the UK. To what extent has the Indian community been receptive to what we would call Hindutva ideology, considering that political Hindutva didn't really take off in India itself until the late 1980s? What was the attraction to these ideas and organizations? Edward Anderson: It's an interesting question. First, it's important to note that there is a kind of received wisdom that the Indian diaspora is highly predisposed toward Hindutva ideology and very sympathetic to the RSS and Narendra Modi*. This has emerged particularly from dramatic political rallies that Modi has participated in that have taken place in London, New York, Texas, Sydney, and various other parts of the world. While it's certainly the case that there is sympathy for Hindutva, there's also a very strong tradition that resists that—a strong liberal, leftist, and socialist tradition. You've already alluded to that when mentioning a few of those names earlier. There's a very diverse range of perspectives in the diaspora, and it's really important not to essentialize, not to generalize, and not to be reductive. That being said, there are certain things that the Hindu nationalist movement and organizations have done that have attempted to cater to the diaspora in certain ways. They provide people with a sense of belonging and pride—people who might be marginalized by society around them more broadly. This is quite unusual and departs significantly from Hindu nationalism in India. The whole point of Hindu nationalism in India is that it's a majoritarian ideology relating to an ostensible majority community, an overwhelming majority community depending on how it's enumerated. Whereas in the diaspora, this is an ideology that appeals to quite a small minority—in fact, a minority that is significantly smaller than the Muslim minority in Britain and the US. That dynamic is notable, particularly in the context of the war on terror and Islamophobia in the West. There's clearly a way for Hindutva and certain Hindu nationalist mobilizations and ideas to engage with that tension and politics as well. Tushar Shetty: What's interesting when I was going through your book was the organizational aspect of this. Could you give us an overview of how Hindutva-leaning groups are organized in the UK and elsewhere – what sections of the diaspora do they cater to, how are they financed, what services do they provide and what role do they play in the community? And to what extent does their messaging and culture differ from the Sangh Parivar* in India? Edward Anderson: That's a really good set of questions with a lot in it, and it's hard to give a short answer. Just like in India, Hindutva groups in the diaspora are extremely heterogeneous. There's a bewildering plethora of different groups, and it feels like there are new ones being set up every year. While some groups might function in one way and reach out to a particular demographic, others might be very different. Even the type of Hindutva that they espouse—the tone and messaging—might differ drastically. In terms of which sections of the diaspora they cater to, one answer would be 'all.' Hindutva is a majoritarian ideology and needs to create an ostensibly monolithic and unified majority community to fulfil its ambitions. In this sense, Hindutva can be all-encompassing. We often hear the term 'Dharmic religions' being used in efforts to incorporate Buddhists, Jains, and Sikhs into the fold, although this can be highly contentious. On one hand, they try to cater to many people, but on the other hand, there are clearly specific focuses. I've already mentioned a notable concentration of East African Asians. Reflecting the demography of East African Asians, there's quite a striking proportion of middle and upper-caste Gujarati Hindus. Another area of focus has been younger generations, which relates to another part of your question about the roles these groups play. These groups are eager to provide a service to the diaspora, particularly second and third generations and their parents, by positioning themselves as a place where they can convey particular versions of Hindu culture, history, and spirituality to people who are dislocated from that and living in another part of the world where they're not necessarily surrounded by it. They function by having classes—language classes, for instance. There's a very pedagogical role that these groups often play. There's a wide range of them as well. I'm referring quite broadly to the Sangh*, but there are also diasporic branches of the VHP* (Vishva Hindu Parishad). The more political side is reflected in the Overseas Friends of the BJP*. There are also various student groups and charities. The other interesting thing is that in the diaspora—and this is something I discuss in relation to an idea called 'Neo-Hindutva,' which I wrote about initially about 10 years ago and pursue further in this book—Neo-Hindutva is a term I've used to explain the way Hindutva has evolved and entered into spaces well beyond the Sangh Parivar*. We see completely new groups that operate and distance themselves from both the ideology of Hindutva and the organizational structures of the Sangh Parivar*. Yet when we look at them closely, we can identify them as Hindutva in ideology, even though they're functioning more in a multicultural context. Tushar Shetty: I recall reading about the HSS* (Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh) in the UK, which is quite similar to the RSS, but I think you noted that they claim to just be influenced by them and not have direct links. To what extent are these Hindu advocacy groups linked to or influenced by the RSS and its affiliates – are they just Sangh Parivar* subsidiaries abroad, or do they have their own independent agenda or presence? We're seeing a wider rise of Hindu advocacy groups gaining ground in places like the US and Canada, e.g. The Hindu American Foundation* comes to mind. Are all these groups linked to the RSS, or are they just a natural consequence of diaspora mobilization, similar to other immigrant communities in the Anglosphere? Edward Anderson: This is an important question and one I try to delve into in depth in the book. The overseas equivalent or wing of the RSS in the diaspora is called the HSS*, the Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh*. Originally in East Africa, it was called the Bharatiya Swayamsevak Sangh*. This group does try to occasionally distance itself from the main RSS in India. They often talk about being inspired by or having ideological commonality with the RSS without being structurally connected. That being said, if you look at the organizations side by side, it's very clear that they are deeply connected. Full-time workers of the RSS in India—Pracharaks*—are sent abroad and work in various communities outside India to facilitate coordination. The Supreme Leader, the Sarsanghchalak* of the RSS, Mohan Bhagwat*, was present in Britain in 2016 for the 50th anniversary celebrations of the HSS* in the UK. We can see RSS leaders traveling across the diaspora, so there are clearly institutional connections. That being said, these groups are vernacularized—they do evolve in slightly different directions. They're not carbon copies of what we see in India in various ways. They also rely to some extent on organic, local volunteers and dynamic local leaders who are heavily invested in what they do. So there is a degree of separateness as well, even though there are clearly institutional links. These institutional links are something that many of these groups have been quite keen to obfuscate, not least because these are registered non-profits in the US and registered charities in Britain. The connection with political organizations is something that's quite contested and has been discussed and debated in various settings over quite a long period of time. Tushar Shetty: Do you think this is substantially different from the way other communities mobilize? We have different examples of this—I'm thinking of AIPAC* in the US, which advocates for Israeli interests, even though it's not necessarily connected to Israel directly in terms of donations, and is supported by the American Jewish community. We have Sikhs in Canada and the US who have strong political networks because of community connections. Is this mobilization or growth of Hindu-focused organizations substantially different from that, or is it just following a familiar pattern? Edward Anderson: I think there are some levels of similarity and other levels of distinctiveness. I wouldn't say that you can reduce all motivations of ethnic minority communities or diasporic communities to being all the same—there is real distinctiveness there, and it's important to study different groups and individuals on their own terms. That being said, there are certainly connections and links, not just across different communities but also across time. I'm a historian, although I work on topics that go almost right up to the present day. If you look at the political identities that were being formed and long-distance activism that was being conducted by Indians in Britain in the very early 20th century—people campaigning against the British Empire, seeking independence from Britain, people considered freedom fighters, including interestingly a founding father of Hindutva, Savarkar*, who was a student in London in the very early part of the 20th century—we can see a longer theme where there are similarities across different groups. But the sorts of connections and ways of doing politics have definitely been different in different parts of the world, in the US and Canada. As you say, there's a diversity of political perspectives among South Asian diasporas. Sometimes, in the case of some Sikh and Khalistani* activists, they come up in very heated and highly contested ways with other sections of the broader South Asian diaspora. Tushar Shetty: Mobilization in any community tends to be disruptive to politics – I wonder how these groups have impacted local politics in the UK and elsewhere. Do they wield enough power to influence legislation and foreign policy, and how do other communities respond to this? We've talked about Khalistani* groups reacting to certain aspects of Hindu nationalism emanating from India, and we also saw the riots in Leicester. I'd be grateful if you could talk about that for our listeners, and if there are other instances of negative fallout or reactions to Hindu politics in the Indian diaspora. Edward Anderson: Let me first address the Leicester tensions. What we saw in Leicester in August and September 2022 was rather unprecedented and extremely upsetting scenes of tension and violence between Hindu and Muslim communities in the city. Leicester is a city in the Midlands in the middle of the UK that saw a very large influx of Asians, particularly South Asian people, in the 1960s and 1970s. It's one of the most diverse parts of the country, with nearly 45% of people identifying in the census as Asian, nearly 20% of the city being Hindu, and nearly 25% being Muslim. It's a very multicultural city that has seen various difficulties over the years, but multiculturalism is often identified as one of the great successes of the city and has enabled it to be economically successful. Tensions between communities have been present, and this reached a head in the summer of 2022. Various triggers have been suggested for what happened, but one might have been a cricket match between India and Pakistan. Following this, tensions spilled over into violence. We saw on social media videos of people walking through parts of the city shouting 'Pakistan Murdabad*' (death to Pakistan) and chanting 'Jai Shri Ram*'—a religious chant often associated with Hindutva. Subsequently, there were retaliations, including a flag being pulled down from a Hindu temple. There was a lot of rumor spreading and social media misinformation. Certain extremist elements, including the far right, were clearly stirring things up. We have evidence suggesting that a large amount of social media interaction on this matter originated in the Indian subcontinent, with hashtags like 'Hindus under attack' being spread in tens and hundreds of thousands of tweets. The flames were clearly being fanned from various parts of the world. This was a moment of considerable tension, and a lot of work has been done subsequently to try to build bridges between communities. While I said it was unprecedented, the unprecedented nature was in its scale and visibility and the reaction to it, but there have been tensions previously. If you go back three decades to 1992, one of the most pivotal moments for Indian democracy was the demolition of the Babri Masjid* by Hindu extremists. This led to significant outbreaks of violence and many deaths between Hindus and Muslims in various parts of India. There are reports from 1992 and 1993 showing that communal tensions had also found their way to Britain and other parts of the diaspora. There were reports of attacks on both Hindu and Muslim places of worship, and suggestions that opportunistic right-wing groups were also stirring things up. These tensions have existed for quite a long time. As well as tensions, there is also a lot of solidarity and groups working together—a lot of good relationships as well. Regarding the impact on UK politics, there has definitely been a concerted effort to influence legislation and be a force of lobbying. This comes back to your previous question about AIPAC*. What we can definitely identify is a desire to replicate the kind of level of influence that certain other communities have, notably the level of influence of certain elements of the Israeli lobby. It's not just a desire to replicate or mimic that but to form alliances as well. This is explored in depth in a new book called Hostile Homelands by Azad Essa*. There's definitely an effort to do advocacy and influence members of parliament, and we've seen this happen in numerous settings. One of the most dramatic was in 2019, when the Labour Party was still being led by Jeremy Corbyn*, who has been quite critical of Modi, has been a strong advocate for Dalit* rights, and has spoken out on the Kashmir issue and human rights issues in Kashmir. This led to an enormous backlash and resistance, with an effort by the Overseas Friends of the BJP* to campaign against the Labour Party in 48 constituencies. This was quite unusual—for the Overseas Friends of the BJP* to campaign specifically on a UK election and try to ensure that someone they framed as being anti-Indian and anti-Hindu would not get into office. There's definitely a level of influence going on there. The extent to which that influence has reaped rewards is a moot point—it's hard to identify necessarily. Tushar Shetty: How is Modi utilizing the Indian diaspora to advance some of his or India's foreign policy goals? Post-2014, do you think Modi's personal popularity has changed the dynamics of the Indian diaspora's politics and contributed to the rise of Hindutva ideas? Perhaps more controversially, could Modi's popularity in the diaspora have any impact on domestic politics in India, either indirectly through media coverage or perhaps directly through campaign contributions? Edward Anderson: This is an important question, certainly one that people have discussed perhaps more than any other aspect of diasporic Hindu nationalism. What we've definitely seen is the BJP being more proactive since 2014—and before that as well—in engaging the diaspora, perhaps much more dynamically than any of their rivals. The rewards they seem to be reaping perhaps reflect that. In 2014, after the election, Modi embarked upon a series of international visits—diplomatic visits, but also visits in which the diaspora featured quite heavily. The first and most striking was him filling out Madison Square Garden, a venue that usually has sports superstars and rock stars on its stage. This was a rock star-type event that the diaspora were extremely excited about in the US. In the following year, we saw a similar event with even more people—maybe 50,000 or 60,000—filling much of Wembley Stadium in west London, England's national football stadium. These were really dramatic scenes, and all of these were livestreamed back to India, which I think is crucial. What you're seeing is the diaspora being engaged with and maybe thanked for their influence and the way they can promote the BJP, Modi, and India more broadly. But what those rallies do is provide really powerful images for media back in India, both via social media—which Hindu nationalists have been very adept at using—and also via mainstream media, which has been very sympathetic to the BJP in recent years. They provide striking images that reflect popularity abroad or try to instill this idea of popularity abroad, which might be influential. The diaspora is still looked up to in many ways for their success and often enhanced levels of cultural, political, and economic capital. While the diaspora might not actually be voting—Indians who take citizenship of another country lose their Indian citizenship, as there's no dual nationality—even NRIs* (Non-Resident Indians) who still have Indian citizenship very often don't vote because it's logistically very complicated. The majority of the Indian diaspora don't vote, and unlike other countries, there's no distance voting option yet. The influence they might have in terms of PR influence or ability to influence people on the ground in India is possibly considered much greater than people who just turn up and vote. Modi has definitely been a key figure—he has inspired people, there's that charisma, assertiveness, and feeling of strength that has been conveyed. The diaspora participate in lots of aspects of that rallying around the individual. One of the early campaigns was 'Chai pe Charcha*' (discussions over tea), in which support for Modi was promoted. These took place across India but also in the diaspora. The diaspora have also been involved via the Overseas Friends of the BJP*, doing car rallies, driving around in different contexts, and even turning up for particular protests. When the BBC released its very controversial two-part Modi documentary, which was banned in India, members of the Indian diaspora went outside BBC headquarters in London and protested against that. There are lots of ways in which support for Modi has been manifested, and he is clearly an important figure. One caveat to add is that there have been surveys that push against the idea of universal support. A survey conducted by the Platform for Indian Democracy* at the end of 2023 suggested that more people of Indian origin in Britain had a negative view than a positive view of Modi and the BJP, particularly among younger generations. Yes, there is hero worship for Modi, like there is among many Indians. There's also a significant proportion of members of the Indian diaspora who would turn up when he comes overseas not to support him but to protest against him. Tushar Shetty: Before we end, I want to ask you—you're a historian, and I was reading recently Lee Kuan Yew's* autobiography, where he talked about the changing dynamics in the Chinese diaspora in Southeast Asia in response to the unification of the People's Republic of China. He discussed how the Malayan Communist Party* attracted many more recruits from the Chinese diaspora, not necessarily due to a flare-up of Communist ideology, but because there was a flare-up of nationalist pride. In that light, to what extent do you think the popularity of Modi and the rise of India as a global power has propelled these Hindutva ideas among the diaspora? Is this just a natural inclination toward Hindutva ideas, or is it also a response to the perceived rise of India in the global arena? Edward Anderson: I certainly wouldn't ever say anything's natural. I think there are always ways of explaining and understanding how things happen. There's not an innate predisposition to any particular sort of politics or identity. What the book discusses is the much longer picture that goes back to the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s. There's a long backstory to the institutional establishment of Hindu nationalism and the ideological inculcation of Hindu nationalism among the Indian diaspora. This goes back a long time, clearly to a period long predating Modi and the 21st century saffronization of India—the 'New India' in which Hindu nationalism and Hindutva have had an impact on almost all aspects of society. But definitely, something different has happened over the last decade or so, and part of that is due to a new level of confidence. Previously, people inclined toward Hindutva might have been more reticent, maybe even secretive about it, less keen to show their cards. But the election of Modi since 2014 has completely changed that. There has been a renewed level of assertiveness and confidence. People are much less shy to discuss that aspect of their politics. Another big difference is that the world is so much more interconnected than it was. The experience of being a member of a diaspora in 2025 is significantly different from what it must have been like in the 1960s or 1970s. I'm not suggesting that in the 1960s or 1970s there was no connection with the subcontinent—that's obviously not the case. There was communication and interaction, but today you're instantly connected and almost constantly connected via social media and a device in your pocket to what's going on in other parts of the world. You're living a transnational life. Those levels of influence—whether it's important news stories, memes, viral YouTube videos, or the latest speech of a political leader—that's all coming to you directly, and you're participating in that directly. That's a phenomenon that has shifted in a very big way over the last decade or so, and I think that, as much as anything else, has had a big impact on the politics of the diaspora. Tushar Shetty: To those who want to read more, I would definitely recommend Edward's book, Hindu Nationalism in the Indian Diaspora. Is this available in India? Edward Anderson: Yes, it was published by Penguin and is available in India. It's published in the US by Oxford University Press and in the UK by Hurst. Tushar Shetty: Fantastic. Edward, thank you so much again for joining the podcast. Edward Anderson: Thanks, it's been great talking to you. Note: Names and terms marked with asterisks have been corrected from the original transcript based on context and standard spellings.*
Time of India
05-07-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Dalai Lama issue: India can't be compliant to China or seen as insensitive to Tibetans, says Robert Barnett
. STRAP: Just days before his 90th birthday on July 6, the Dalai Lama — the revered spiritual leader of Tibetan Buddhism — declared that he would have a successor. The announcement is more than a theological decision since China has long sought control over the succession process. Neelam Raaj spoke to Robert Barnett, a leading Tibet scholar at SOAS, London, for insights into this high-stakes contest between faith and power. As someone who has studied Tibet closely, were you surprised by the Dalai Lama's recent announcement regarding his succession, especially given his earlier remarks suggesting he might be the last incumbent? For many years, the Dalai Lama has been reminding the public that he can choose from innumerable options and alternatives in terms of his succession. Sometimes he expressed this in a light-hearted way, such as saying he might come back as a butterfly, while at other times he referred to not returning at all, or he listed little-known theological alternatives, such as transmitting his consciousness to another adult through a process called 'trulwa' or emanation. But all of these alternatives were reminders that in Tibetan Buddhism it is the individual lama, and the karma of that individual lama, which decides how or whether a lama returns. Of course, these have all been messages to China and its rulers that their claim to have the sole right to control reincarnations makes little sense in the religious context. The Dalai Lama had also always said that the decision about whether he returns would depend on the wishes of his followers, and his officials spent the last year or more getting written opinions from the wider Buddhist community about that request. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 5 Books Warren Buffett Wants You to Read In 2025 Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo This process was partly ceremonial – it reflects a very traditional understanding that a lama reincarnates only if his or her followers request for him or her to do so. So, no one doubted that the community would ask the Dalai Lama to return, and his decision to reincarnate is not a surprise. But here again the Dalai Lama seems to be sending a message to China, namely that, unlike Beijing, his decisions and his legitimacy are not based on the use of force or the resort to traditional authority, but on processes of consent and consultation. Tell us about the history of this contentious golden urn method of picking a successor. Contemporary Chinese officials say that in 1792-3 an order was given by the then emperor of China requiring Tibetans to use a golden vase or urn as the final stage in deciding between three children identified as candidate reincarnations of a high lama. After reciting appropriate prayers, the winning name would be drawn from the urn. This claim is correct, and , , the golden urn system was used scores of times in Tibet and Mongolia and other areas to select reincarnations up until the early 1900s. The current Chinese government claims that it is thus merely invoking a long-running legal precedent that requires Tibetans today to only use the same system and at the same time to recognise that only the Chinese government can authorize and select reincarnations. However, there are major weaknesses in this claim. Firstly, there had been scarcely any mention or use of the golden urn system for nearly 100 years before Beijing abruptly reintroduced it in 1995. Secondly, the emperors in the past who were involved with reincarnations and the golden urn were not Chinese and their governments were not Chinese – they were Manchus and were Buddhist believers, and were regarded by Tibetans at the time in many cases as emanations of the Buddha. Thirdly, it is not clear that use of the urn had meant in the past that the government in Beijing was seen by Tibetans as a sign of imperial sovereignty; according to the pioneering work of the historian Max Oidtmann, the process seems to have been more one of cooperation between Tibetans and the Manchus rather than one imposed on the former by the latter. And fourthly, the Manchu involvement in reincarnations seems to have been often understood by Tibetans as a kind of available option at times of dispute, rather than a law they were required to follow. And in general, religions and their believers tend to give priority to traditions and beliefs, rather than state laws. So, Beijing's invocation of 18th-century Manchu-Tibetan religious relations as proof of Chinese sovereignty today describes a world that seems vastly different from the contemporary situation. How do you anticipate Beijing will respond to this announcement? If China proceeds to name its own successor, are we looking at the possibility of two Dalai Lamas? It seems very likely, now that the Dalai Lama has announced that there will be a 15th Dalai Lama, that China will feel required to assert its sovereignty in these matters by naming its own Dalai Lama. So we are looking at a future, after the lifetime of the present Dalai Lama, where there will be two competing Dalai Lamas. But this will not be like a medieval competition between two rival popes, because only one of these Dalai Lamas will have been selected according to religious traditions and with the imprimatur of the previous Dalai Lama – the one who will be selected by the exiles. The Chinese candidate will have been selected by the Chinese state, whose rulers are by definition atheists if not, at times, outright enemies of religion. So, the Chinese candidate is at risk of having limited credibility among the Buddhist community and worldwide. Yet we might want to keep in mind that everything we are reading about is at some level a process of signalling to China. So the Dalai Lama's announcement is also an indirect reminder that if China wished to, it could still offer him a settlement. That settlement is actually easy to imagine, in theory: the Chinese could simply return to the position they took on reincarnation in the 1980s and the early 1990s, when they claimed only the right to confirm the choices made by the relevant lamas and did not claim any role in the reincarnation process or selection itself. But few people currently expect today's Chinese leaders to make concessions. The Dalai Lama has suggested that his reincarnation could be found outside China. If that successor emerges from the Tibetan diaspora in India, what kind of diplomatic and political challenges might this pose for New Delhi? The succession of the Dalai Lama has become a controversy because of Beijing's claim in 1995 to have sole authority over that process. Why did it make that claim, which is clearly one that would lead to conflict and dispute? One theory is that Chinese foreign policy strategists see an advantage in using this issue to advance China's aims abroad. According to this theory, the succession issue provides a new opportunity for China's diplomats to seek compliance from other governments – it provides an entry-point for China to call on those governments to support its claims and to denounce any claims or actions by the Tibetan exiles. If so, it's a clever move, because most governments have few exiles and few Buddhists in their population. Such governments might feel it less costly to comply with China's request than to refuse on what for them will seem a minor or obscure issue. But this is not, of course, the case for India, for whom such a request would have major implications in terms of soft power, international diplomacy, religious respect and even border negotiations. Whatever happens, India will be the chief focus among all nations of China's strategic interests in this matter, and will likely come under significant Chinese pressure. India's policy makers and diplomats will certainly be deploying all their skills and resources in order to find a way to respond to those pressures without seeming compliant to China or insensitive to Tibetan or religious priorities. How do you interpret China's recent efforts in Tibet — including large-scale infrastructure projects, population resettlements, and the campaign to re-educate Tibetan children? It used to be rather difficult for outside analysts to characterise Chinese policies in Tibet – they varied, being sometimes extremely harsh and in other ways and at certain times less so. But since 2014 a new policy has emerged under Xi Jinping which is clear: minorities, including the Tibetans and others, are to be gradually 'integrated' (jiaorong in Chinese) into the larger Chinese 'community' or nation (Zhonghua minzu). It has also become clear that Xi Jinping has ordered this process to begin from early childhood, because since 2021 his government has required all kindergartens – and kindergarten attendance is more or less compulsory these days for children aged 3-5 or so – to teach primarily or solely in the Chinese language. These schools and preschools increasingly teach children about Chinese or Communist history and values, rather than Tibetan ones. So there are serious concerns about the extent to which the next generation of Tibetans, Uyghur, Mongols and others within China will have substantive knowledge of their mother-tongue or their culture. At the same time, China has been moving many thousands of rural and nomadic Tibetans to settlements in or near towns, or to remote border regions, sometimes for very unclear reasons, and this too is likely to have a dramatic impact on cultural traditions and identity. There will be practical benefits for some of these relocated people, in terms of work, medical access and knowledge of Chinese, but there is much uncertainty about the overall effect of what is an ongoing process of massive social and cultural engineering.
Sky News
04-07-2025
- Politics
- Sky News
Why does China care who the next Dalai Lama is?
👉 Listen to Sky News Daily on your podcast app 👈 The Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso, is turning 90 and has confirmed - after years of uncertainty - that he will have a successor after his death and will not choose to end the line. In Tibetan Buddhist tradition, the Dalai Lama is reincarnated after they die. Monks search, select, and school a successor - usually a child. The current Dalai Lama was recognised at the age of two. He and an estimated 150,000 Tibetans now live in exile in India, and other countries, after China annexed Tibet decades ago. And that makes who the next Dalai Lama is, a concern of China's. Joining Matt Barbett is Professor Robert Barnett, who founded the Modern Tibetan Studies Programme at Columbia University and is now at University of London's School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS). He has also met the Dalai Lama several times.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
07-06-2025
- Politics
- Business Standard
Technology must aid, not replace, human mind in judicial decision: CJI
Technology must complement, not replace, the human mind in judicial decision-making, Chief Justice of India BR Gavai has said while emphasising that the value of discretion, empathy and judicial interpretation is irreplaceable. In his keynote address on "Role of Technology in the Indian Legal System" at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) of the University of London, the CJI said while the judiciary welcomes innovations like automated cause lists, digital kiosks and virtual assistants, it must ensure that human oversight, ethical guidelines and robust training are integral to their implementation. "The value of discretion, empathy and judicial interpretation is irreplaceable," Justice Gavai said and pointed out that the Indian judiciary is well-positioned to develop homegrown ethical frameworks tailored to the country's constitutional and societal realities. "We possess the technological expertise, the judicial foresight and the democratic mandate to build systems that reflect our values of equality, dignity and justice," he said. "In fact, in the very first week after assuming office as the chief justice of India, I initiated a discussion with the Centre for Research and Planning of the Supreme Court to prepare a comprehensive note on the ethical use of artificial intelligence and emerging technologies in the judiciary. "Technology must complement, not replace, the human mind in judicial decision-making," the CJI said, adding, "The emphasis must always be on using technology to enhance trust and transparency -- never to replace the human conscience at the heart of justice." He said though the judiciary has started to embrace technology, with the emergence of artificial-intelligence (AI) tools in judicial processes -- from case management to legal research, document translation and even predictive analytics -- there must be caution. "Around the world, debates are ongoing about the ethical use of AI in legal systems. Concerns include algorithmic bias, misinformation, data manipulation and breaches of confidentiality. For instance, sensitive information, such as the identity of a victim of crime, must never be disclosed due to AI error or the absence of clear protocols. Additionally, a few recent cases have shown that AI tools can generate fabricated citations or biased suggestions if not properly regulated and monitored," the CJI underscored. He added that technology, if anchored in constitutionalism and empathy, can transform access to justice from an abstract ideal into a lived and shared reality. "As we continue our journey toward modernising the Indian legal system, our approach must remain deeply rooted in constitutional values. The integration of technology must be people-centric, inclusive and guided by ethical clarity. Our ultimate goal should be to make justice accessible to every citizen, regardless of language, geography, income or digital literacy," he said. Concluding his address, Justice Gavai said, "I firmly believe that access to justice is not solely the responsibility of the judiciary. It is a shared national commitment. Law schools, civil society, legal-aid institutions and governments must work in unison to develop and promote technological models that are accessible, transparent and inclusive." Meanwhile, at a joint event of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) and Trilegal organised on the occasion of London International Disputes Week, CJI Gavai said in recent decades, the justice-delivery mechanism, once confined within the boundaries of courtrooms, has witnessed a significant shift towards modes of alternative dispute resolution, with arbitration emerging as a prominent pillar of that transformation. The CJI was speaking on the topic of "Navigating the evolving landscape: The impact of the 7th edition of the SIAC Rules on India-Related Arbitrations". "At the cusp of this evolution lies the recognition that justice, particularly in complex commercial disputes, need not be adversarial or bureaucratic. Rather, it must be confidential, expert-driven and above all, tailored to the needs of those who seek it. Arbitration, in this context, is a substantive recalibration of how we understand and deliver justice," he said. Justice Gavai pointed out that over the last 10-15 years, India has made a multi-pronged effort towards its aspiration of building a favourable and sought-after place for arbitration. "While legislative reforms have significantly strengthened India's arbitration framework, the judiciary has also played a proactive role in fostering a more arbitration-friendly environment. Various progressive judgments by the Supreme Court of India over the last few years stand testament to this. Nonetheless, the enormity of India as a country has ensured that certain on-ground challenges continue," he said. "The Indian judiciary has and will continue to recognise and respect the autonomy of the arbitral process, ensuring that the courts step in only when demanded by the needs of justice," he added. The CJI said, "In conclusion, I am happy to note that the 7th edition of the SIAC Rules is a forward-looking endeavour, aimed at enhancing efficiency while balancing fairness. For India, whose commercial players are increasingly global in outlook and operation, these rules offer both an opportunity and a challenge -- the opportunity to align with international best practices and the challenge to elevate our own standards while balancing them with India's practical realities.
