India at a crossroads of religion vs democracy — still a ‘country of particular concern’

Each year, the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom names those nations whose governments engage in or tolerate “particularly severe” violations of religious freedoms, especially of minorities. It calls such nations ‘Countries of Particular Concern’ and it asks the US state department to sanction individuals and institutions in these nations.

This year, these are Afghanistan, Burma, China, Cuba, Eritrea, India, Iran, Nicaragua, Nigeria, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Vietnam.

India first arrived on the list in 2020 and has been on it each year since.

In the 2020 report, the USCIRF said that ‘India took a sharp downward turn in 2019. The national government used its strengthened parliamentary majority to institute national-level policies violating religious freedom across India, especially for Muslims’.

It said the Modi government’s prejudice against India’s Muslims was showing through India’s actions on citizenship laws, cow slaughter, Kashmir and conversions. The report noted the Ayodhya ruling and the conduct of Uttar Pradesh chief minister Yogi Adityanath.

It recommended to Donald Trump, then US president, that he designate India as a Country of Particular Concern ‘for engaging in and tolerating systematic, ongoing, and egregious religious freedom violations, as defined by the International Religious Freedom Act’. It sought sanctions against India.

The response from our ministry of external affairs was as follows: ‘We reject the observations on India in the USCIRF Annual Report. Its biased and tendentious comments against India are not new. But on this occasion, its misrepresentation has reached new levels. It has not been able to carry its own commissioners in its endeavour. We regard it as an organisation of particular concern and will treat it accordingly.’

India did not respond to a single accusation or deny any of the facts.

The reference to ‘carry its own commissioners’ is about dissenting notes from two of the commissioners, Gary Bauer and Tenzin Dorjee, who agreed with the other seven commissioners that the situation in India was problematic but did not want it to be designated a CPC.

The next year, 2021, the report noted that in India, ‘disinformation and hateful rhetoric — including from government officials — often targeted religious minorities, continuing familiar patterns’ during the Covid-19 pandemic.

This time, there was no dissent. And from here on, each of the four years under president Biden, there has been none.

The government of India did not respond to the 2021 report. In another pattern that has continued since, sometimes India has hit back and at other times simply been silent.

In the 2025 report, released on 25 March, the USCIRF said (among other things) that the Trump administration should ‘impose targeted sanctions on individuals and entities, such as Vikash Yadav and RAW, for their culpability in severe violations of religious freedom by freezing their assets and/or barring their entry into the United States’.

Within hours, our ministry of external affairs put out a statement that called the report 'biased and politically motivated’ and said it was attempting to 'misrepresent isolated incidents and cast aspersions on India's vibrant multicultural society reflect a deliberate agenda rather than a genuine concern for religious freedom’.

It reiterated that ‘In fact, it is the USCIRF that should be designated as an entity of concern’.

One wishes that the Indian government does designate USCIRF formally and sanctions it, because it is true that it is not free from bias.

The USCIRF refers to itself as a ‘bipartisan’ body, meaning both Republicans and Democrats are represented in it and it advises the US state department. But it is partisan in other ways. The USCIRF reports make no reference to the genocide in Gaza and the apartheid practised by Israel against Palestinians — including Christians — because that is inconvenient for the US government.

It would have been better for India to have responded to the specific allegations. But in our part of the world, who says something is as important and perhaps even more important than what is being said.

We should have responded specifically, particularly because it may not necessarily be true that the people saying it are biased or politically motivated against us.

This is how the 2021 USCIRF report on India ended:

‘Individual views of Commissioner Johnnie Moore:

‘I love India. I have floated early in the morning down the Ganges in Varanasi, walked every alley in Old Delhi, stood in awe of the architecture in Agra, sipped tea next to the Dalai Lama’s temple in Dharamsala, circled the shrine in Ajmer, and looked in awe at the Golden Temple. All along the way, I have met Christian brothers and sisters who serve the poor selflessly, often in difficult circumstances.

‘Of all the countries in the world, India should not be a country of particular concern. It is the world’s largest democracy and it is governed by a pristine Constitution. It is diversity personified and its religious life has been its greatest historic blessing.

‘Yet, India does seem to be at a crossroads. Its democracy — still young and freewheeling — is creating through the ballot box difficult challenges for itself.

‘The answer, of course, is for India’s institutions to draw upon their rich history to protect their values. India must always resist allowing political and intercommunal conflict to be exacerbated by religious tensions.

‘India’s government and people have everything to gain and absolutely nothing to lose from preserving social harmony and protecting the rights of everyone.

‘India can. India must.’

Views are personal. More of Aakar Patel’s writing may be read here.