Mayank Chhaya Daily

On Rajiv Gandhi's 33rd death anniversary, a reminiscence, again

Rajiv Gandhi, August 20, 1944—May 21, 1991

On the 33rd death anniversary today of India's former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, I republish a piece I had written on May 21, 2018.

May 21, 2018

Among the few rewards for a print journalist is the gift of being granted a ringside view of history-making events. I have had my share which is now getting rather dated, a clear sign of professional diminishment.

Today marks the 27th anniversary of for former Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi’s macabre assassination. In keeping with my tangential connections with seminal events in India’s contemporary history since 1981-82, when I began journalism, this is one such. I tried to capture it in a 1992 biography where I wrote:

“The dessert cooler outside my bedroom made a squeaky noise that night. I had postponed lubricating it for far too long. Behind the door a cricket chirped incessantly. God had omitted lubricating it altogether. The two noises combined to produce an eerie effect. I was gradually slipping into sleep when the phone rang. There is nothing more exasperating than being interrupted in the first stages of sleep. I have this habit of looking at the clock by my bedside every time I  am woken up by a phone call. It was 11 p.m. on May 21.

Shreyans Shah was calling from Ahmedabad. Shah, the owner of the Gujarat Samachar, the largest Gujarati daily in the world, asked me a matter-of-fact question. “Is it true that Rajiv Gandhi has been assassinated?” Without realising the shattering import of his question I said I didn’t know. Shah sounded pretty certain about the news, but since I live in New Delhi he probably thought that I would be better informed about such matters. I promised to get back to him as soon as I found out the truth.

I called Sam Pitroda to ask him if he had heard anything about Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination. There was silence on the other end, a silence jagged by anguish. Pitroda had just recovered from a quadruple bypass surgery a few months before, and despite his protestations to the contrary he was still not fit enough to take such news with equanimity. If hurt could be seen on telephone, I saw it that night.”

The quote accurately situates me in the context within 40 minutes of a Tamil Tiger suicide bomber setting off her explosive vest barely five feet away from Gandhi at 10.10 p.m. in Sriperumbudur in Tamil Nadu, where he had gone to address an election rally.

It was inevitable that as a journalist I did not sleep that night. Among the callers was the host of a news show on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation asking me to report on the assassination. I remember he asked me if there was any immediate suspicion as to the identity of Gandhi’s killers. I told him that given that it was a suicide bomber in the southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu it was more than likely that it would turn out to be a plot by the Tamil Tigers separatists of Sri Lanka. It did.

I had met Gandhi a few days before his assassination at a “high tea” in the forecourt of his residence. During a brief exchange I had reminded him that I was waiting for him to give me a couple of hours to finish my interview with him in order to complete Pitroda’s biography. “I promise you as soon as the campaigning is over,” he said.

The next time I was anywhere close to him was at the Delhi airport when his badly dismembered body was flown in by a special aircraft in a casket. Since those were pre-24/7 news channel days, there was no media frenzy at the airport. There were only two journalists—my friend and colleague Tarun Basu and I. Gandhi’s close friend and journalist Suman Dubey was among the men shouldering the casket as the former prime minister’s wife Sonia Gandhi came down from the aircraft looking poised but inscrutable. However, her eyes gave a glimpse of the profound sense of loss she must be feeling.

The passage of nearly three decades has done nothing to erase the vividness of those 24 hours. I watched Gandhi’s career rather closely but I find it instructive that apart from the the night he was assassinated, an incident that I remember about him the most by had nothing to do with his career.

It was sometime in March, 1991, just a couple of months before Gandhi’s assassination that Tarun and I had an unusual encounter with him. If memory serves, it was the day when Gandhi’s Congress Party had withdrawn support to the government of Prime Minister Chandra Shekhar. Chandra Shekhar lasted barely seven months as prime minister before resigning on March 6, 1991.

Tarun and I were returning to office from the parliament after the collapse of the government. Tarun was driving his blue Fiat. As he reversed without looking back we almost crashed into a convoy of cars transporting Gandhi who was at the wheel himself in his SUV. Tarun managed to jam the brake in time but not before causing great anxiety to the former prime minister’s security detail, members of which jumped out with their weapons drawn.

Gandhi saw Tarun and I, both of whom he knew somewhat, smiled and implied that he recognized that Tarun had screwed up. He told his security to let us go even as he waved at us, chuckling.

As people reminisce about Gandhi today, many are pointing out his civility. However, I do remember how reviled he was for precisely that reason. His passion for technology and modernity in particular were the prime target of his detractors’ derision. It is interesting that among his most vocal critics were members of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) who dismissed his idea about computerization with contempt and ridicule. Gandhi was described as “baba log”, someone from a background of great privilege and utterly out of touch with ordinary citizens.

Gandhi was as much a product of his time as he was of his circumstances. Think about that sentence. It sounds rather insightful but it actually does not mean much other than the fact that it is true of any human being on the planet. I wrote it because it sounds as if I know something that you might not. But for his mother, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s equally gruesome assassination in 1984, Rajiv Gandhi would perhaps never have entered politics. It was the fact that he came unencumbered of doctrinaire ideas about Indian society that he chose the path of modernity for its polity that he did. He succeeded to a reasonable extent but was devoured by some of the very things he tried to stand up against both within his party and outside in government.

His vision of India was articulated by him in 1985 during the centenary celebrations of the Indian National Congress. In a speech that reverberated because of his candor about corruption in the country Gandhi spoke of themes that sound so distant now given his party’s decimation.

Let me quote a bit from that 1985 speech. I happened to report the centenary celebrations for the Associated Press (AP).

“What has become of our great organisation? Instead of a party that fired the imagination of the masses throughout the length and breadth of India, we have shrunk, losing touch with the toiling millions. It is not a question of victories and defeats in elections. For a democratic party, victories and defeats are part of its continuing political existence. But what does matter is whether or not we work among the masses, whether or not we are in tune with their struggles, their hopes and aspirations. We are a party of social transformation, but in our preoccupation with governance we are drifting away from the people. Thereby, we have weakened ourselves and fallen prey to the ills that the loss of invigorating mass contact brings.

Millions of ordinary Congress workers throughout the country are full of enthusiasm for the Congress policies and programmes. But they are handicapped, for on their backs ride the brokers of power and influence, who dispense patronage to convert a mass movement into a feudal oligarchy. They are self-perpetuating cliques who thrive by invoking the slogans of caste and religion and by enmeshing the living body of the Congress in their net of avarice.”

His reference to power brokers struck a lot of people as a refreshing change for the party president to talk about. It is ironic that nearly three decades hence even as the Congress struggles to retain its relevance under the leadership of Gandhi’s son Rahul, it continues to face some of those very ills on top of some very serious existential challenges.

I remember a contemporary Indian leader having used perhaps for the first time the term “medieval obscurantism”. I wrote that down and underlined it in my pad. I suspect the term was coined as well as the speech written by Mani Shankar Aiyar, who went on to become Gandhi’s speech writer and adviser.

“As we have distanced ourselves from the masses, basic issues of national unity and integrity, social change and economic development recede into the background. Instead, phoney issues, shrouded in medieval obscurantism, occupy the centre of the stage. Our Congress workers, who faced the bullets of British imperialism, run for shelter at the slightest manifestation of caste and communal tension,” Gandhi said.

Now let me gratuitously use a photograph of mine from the centenary event at Bombay’s Brabourne Stadium. It shows me talking to the actor,director and producer Sunil Dutt who was a high-profile member of the party. It was in the same pad that I wrote down in bold “medieval obscurantism.” So there is some stretched-out reason to use the picture.

Actor, director Sunil Dutt (left) with Mayank Chhaya (Photo circa 1985, possibly by Chandu Mhatre)

The Debit Card

A short story of mine. 

By Mayank Chhaya

Raisin Kliff was at his favorite art store ‘Bristles’ to purchase some paint and canvases. He picked up the supplies and went to the cashier named Raven. She was in her late teens and knew Raisin very well as a regular customer.

She scanned the paint and canvases and said, “That is 23.40.”

Raisin handed her his debit card. She swiped it but the system beeped. She cleaned the card on her apron and swiped it again. The system beeped again. Raisin was surprised. He told her to try one more time since he knew there was enough money in his account. She did. “Sir, it says your card has been blocked.”

Raisin left the supplies on the floor and stepped aside in order not to hold up other customers. He called his bank. He punched several auto prompts with increasing annoyance.

Even though he knew he was talking to some rudimentary AI girl he said, “May I PLEASE speak to a real human being? You know one who has real genitals and not all smooth brushed steel down there.”

Some Bristles customers in the line laughed while others were embarrassed. One of them covered her child’s ears but it was too late. Raven smiled knowingly as if saying without actually saying it, “That’s Raisin for you.”

Finally, a real customer service representative came on the line and said, “May I know who I am speaking with?”

“Raisin Kliff.”

The rep could not help herself and laughed, “Raisin, is that your real name? Why are you called Raisin?”

“Because when I was a baby, my mom left me in the sun for days to dry out,” he said. “Fuck my name. Can we get on with our business?” Raisin said.

“I need your birthdate, sir,” the rep said.

“It is December 6, 1942. I turned 82 yesterday. I am old enough to be patient but not care if I am not,” he said.

“Sir, how may I help you?” the rep said.

“I was declined a charge of 23.40. I know I am poor but even I am not so poor,” Raisin said.

As he waited for the rep to check listening to some feverish keyboarding, he signaled Raven that he would be done soon. She just winked at him.

“Sir, I am back. Sorry to keep you holding and thank you for your patience. All that I can tell you is that your charge was declined because there is insufficient balance in your account,” she said.

“What’s that? What’s your name? Megan, is it? Listen, Megan, that is absurd. I deposited 500 in cash yesterday,” Raisin said.

“Yes sir, I see that deposit but right now your account is negative 800,” she said.

“What? Who took my money? I have not spent a penny since the deposit,” Raisin said.

The rep explained that she will have to escalate it to her manager because she was not authorized to discuss details.

Raisin was put on hold. As he waited, he fidgeted with his debit card and bounced on his toes.

“Mr. Kilff,” said a male voice on the phone. “My name is Kiefer. Let me check your account,” he said and trailed off into some rapid keyboarding.

“Okay sir, there is an IRS lien on your account. They have frozen your account. I am afraid there is nothing I can do. You will have to speak to them. I am so sorry for your trouble,” Kiefer said, adding, “Is there anything else I can do?”

Raisin became strangely calm and said, “No, thank you very much, Kiefer. That will be all.”

As he ended the call, he looked at the high ceiling of the store, noticing some remarkable patterns in the glistening white iron girders holding up the light grey roof. He started whistling. He waited for Raven to finish with a customer and then went to her.

“Sorry, darling. There is a problem with my account. I cannot pay for the supplies today,” he said and started to leave the counter without the supplies.

“Hold on, Mr. Kliff. I will pay for it. You can pay me back on your next visit. It is not even 25 bucks,” Raven said.

“No, Raven. I couldn’t do that,” Raisin said.

“I insist. Paint something that will fetch you millions,” she said.

Raisin became emotional and broke down. Raven stepped out from behind the counter and hugged him. He kissed her on the forehead, picked up the supplies and left. Just before exiting, he turned around, whistled with four fingers to draw Raven’s attention and curtsied.

Raisin had planned to have lunch at a nearby restaurant but dropped the idea for obvious reasons. Driving home he kept looking at his precariously low gas level. He did not want to be stalled on the freeway and get a ticket.

Half an hour later he was home. He checked his mailbox and found a letter from the IRS. It was a notice of lien on his account for unpaid taxes eleven years ago. It was in the amount of $1376. He found out the IRS had cleaned out his account of the $576 he had that morning and put a freeze of another $800. That meant anything he earned up to that amount would automatically go to the IRS.

He thought for a bit about whether to call the IRS to resolve the lien but then decided to paint instead. Thanks to Raven, he had the supplies.

Instead of using brushes he decided to use his frozen debit card. He took out tubes of silver, white and grey paint and squeezed them directly on a canvas. For the next 30 minutes he used the card to slash and slice paint patterns replicating what he saw on Bristle’s ceiling and then abstracted them with such vehemence that he was surprised by it himself.

The painting was finished with one diagonal line across the canvas in white impasto. As a final flourish he pressed the debit card in the middle leaving a mirror impression of its number. With great flourish he wrote “Declined” in all caps and signed his name at the bottom right corner of the canvas ‘R Kliff’ as he always did.

He had lunch.

He then wrote note that said,

“Dear Raven,

I was deeply touched by your gesture in paying for my supplies. I came home and rapidly painted this work which I am dedicating to you by naming it after you. If it ever sells, whatever amount it makes is entirely yours. Consider it an inheritance to a daughter I never had from a father you never had.

So long,

Kliff.”

He put the note in an envelope, inscribed Raven’s name, store address and phone number. He also wrote, “Consider this my final will.”

He walked around his studio-cum-apartment picking up and putting down artifacts he had collected over the years. He finally picked up a brass Vajra and put it in his shirt pocket.

Raisin then went to a safe and took out a gun.

He sat down in a broken wicker chair, put the gun in his mouth and shot himself. He died instantly.

His body was discovered two days later.

The police called Raven to inform her of Raisin’s death and the note on the painting. They ruled it as suicide.

About a month later, an art dealer happened to come to Bristles. He saw Raisin’s painting behind Raven.

“Yours?” he asked.

“Yes, but not by me. It is by my father,” Raven said.

“Would you like to sell? I can put it up for auction at Chhaya’s, which is a leading auction house in the city,” the dealer said.

Raven thought for a bit and said, “But it is a gift from my father. How can I sell it?”

“Keep my card in case you decide to sell,” the dealer said and left.

Going through Raisin’s diary she found out that he had not sold a single painting in his long career. He had amassed more than 5000 works. In one entry, Raisin had written, “What if a work of mine went under the hammer at Chhaya’s and fetched a few million!”

Raven called the art dealer.

Two months later, Raisin’s work titled ‘Raven’ was featured in the “New Contemporary Artists’ section.  Raven was in the audience. The bidding on Raisin’s work began at $2500. To the stunning surprise of the auctioneer and the audience bidding went on for 45 minutes, finally ending at $2.4 million, a record in Chhaya’s 200-year-old history for a new work by an unknown artist as well as in terms of bidding escalation.

Raven cried uncontrollably over a photograph of Raisin that she had carried with her.

That evening she went to Bristles and quit her job to become a curator of Raisin’s 5000-plus works.

Some observations about Jonathan Yeo's portrait of Charles

British painter Jonathan Yeo has been receiving quite a lot of flak for his official portrait of King Charles. The reasons are not hard to find and understand. Although as someone who paints daily, I have no particular problem with the portrait as a piece of art but it is certainly problematic as a piece of art as a portrait. I do not have any particular problem with it. In fact, I think it is quite bold as a piece of art. 

Coming as it does while Charles is dealing with cancer, there is something compelling about the portrait's sanguine, somewhat sangria-like tones. Yeo took four sittings between June 2021 and November 2023 to finish the portrait that measures approximately 8 1/2 by 6 1/2 feet framed. 

Yeo said of the painting: “When I started this project, His Majesty The King was still His Royal Highness The Prince of Wales, and much like the butterfly I've painted hovering over his shoulder, this portrait has evolved as the subject's role in our public life has transformed.”

It is quite obvious that the painting has been widely reviled too. For instance, Jonathan Jones writes in The Guardian, "Yeo’s portrait of the king is replete with all his vices. It is technically superficial and unfelt. There’s no insight into the king’s personality here, just a weird allegory about a monarch butterfly that Yeo says is a symbol of his metamorphosis from prince to king." That's ouch! 

However, as a painter myself, I can tell you that it takes a great deal of talent to produce what Yeo has done. As a work of art it may be an acquired taste but his skills as a painter are quite evident. The treatment where everything else except Charles' face and hands stand out unlike the rest of his body draped in his Welsh Guards uniform almost vanishing into the canvas is an interesting one. It is almost like an apparition.

I am approaching it as art rather than a painting of a real person. One may argue that the whole purpose of a portrait, and that too an officially commissioned one, is to faithfully capture that person's essence and personality. I would argue that the purpose of art is art. I am sure Charles did not sit down expecting a photorealistic image. For that he could have chosen to be, well, photographed.

Yeo's explanation of using the Monarch butterfly as a symbol to underscore Charles's metamorphosis is a bit too obvious. However as an artist, it is his right to do whatever he wants. 

Speaking of artists doing what they want, here is my rapid interpretation of the painting.

 

US disinclined to jeopardize India ties over alleged plot to kill Sikh separatist

The following appeared today in South Asia Monitor. 

By Mayank Chhaya

The disclosure by The Washington Post of the identity of an officer in India’s spy agency, the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) to be allegedly behind the thwarted plot to assassinate a U.S.-based Sikh separatist is remarkable for wholly unexpected reasons.

The newspaper’s investigative report on April 29 reveals almost as an incidental fact the extraordinary length to which the Biden administration appears to have gone to soften the blow on the Modi government.

“White House officials warned the Modi government this month that The Post was close to publishing an investigation that would reveal new details about the case. It did so without notifying The Post,” the paper said.

The fact that Washington alerted New Delhi to the upcoming publication of the damning story underscores how the Biden administration has made a clear determination that robust bilateral relations between the two countries take precedence even over the alleged plot that would have brazenly violated America’s sovereignty had it been successful.

It was bad enough as it is that the alleged plot to assassinate the Sikh separatist Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, whom India classifies as a terrorist, unfolded on U.S. soil and nearly worked.

However, now that the Post story has identified Vikram Yadav, as a RAW officer to be a key figure, the alleged assassination plot has acquired specific contours.

Yadav’s identity was no breaking news for the Biden administration since it was uncovered by its investigators. It is not clear though whether Washington specifically shared the details about Yadav’s identity with New Delhi preemptively. The paper has said the U.S. government informed the Indian government that “new details” about the case were going to be revealed.

It is conceivable that the Biden administration did indeed share specific details with India. The foreknowledge of the Post story ought to have prepared the Modi government for any likely fallout.

 It is obvious that the U.S. sees India as perhaps its most important strategic relationship not just in Asia but even globally in the context of an increasingly assertive China. With that being the case, it has rationalized that bilateral relations are not worth jeopardizing over the Pannun plot despite its unprecedented nature.

Both President Joe Biden and Prime Minister Narendra Modi are in the midst of crucial national elections and the former may not consider worth his while at this juncture to escalate tensions with the latter over what is at its core a feature of global spy craft. The U.S. is no stranger to carrying out such hits on foreign soil. If anything, in many ways it pioneered them.

Domestically, the alleged Indian plot has next to no political consequence for Biden since average Americans are not known to focus on such convoluted global issues as Sikh separatists trying to hive off the Indian state of Punjab from India.

The more damning details of the alleged plot were already known since December last year but there are some specific pointers that are potentially troublesome for New Delhi. For instance, this passage: “U.S. spy agencies have more tentatively assessed that Modi’s national security adviser, Ajit Doval, was probably aware of RAW’s plans to kill Sikh activists, but officials emphasized that no smoking gun proof has emerged.”

With the U.S. presidential election a little more than six months away and Biden bizarrely trailing former President Donald Trump, the Post story may eventually just slide by. The results of the Indian election will be known by June 5. Irrespective of whether Modi wins or loses this issue is of no significant consequence for him either.

For sure, the timing of the Post disclosure is inopportune for Modi. Notwithstanding that, for that minority of Indians which pays attention to such developments, especially the prime minister’s steadfast supporters, the alleged plot is merely reaffirmation of his muscular foreign policy.

Officially, however, Randhir Jaiswal, spokesperson for India’s Ministry of External Affairs, has been dismissive about the Post story. In a formal statement he said, “The report in question makes unwarranted and unsubstantiated imputations on a serious matter. There is ongoing investigation of the High-Level Committee set up by the Government of India to look into the security concerns shared by the US government on networks of organized criminals, terrorists and others. Speculative and irresponsible comments on it are not helpful.”

Given that the Modi government is focused almost entirely on the parliamentary election, there is no prospect of any substantive action in the matter until after the election results are out on June 4 or 5.

Timing of Washington Post naming Indian spy operative in Pannun plot inopportune for Modi

The following was published on April 30 in Indica News. 

By Mayank Chhaya

The disclosure by The Washington Post of Vikram Yadav as an officer in India’s spy agency, the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) to be allegedly behind the thwarted plot to assassinate the U.S.-based Sikh separatist Gurpatwant Singh Pannun has come at a particularly inopportune time for the Narendra Modi government.

However, the publication of the investigative story by Greg Miller, Gerry Shih and Ellen Nakashima in the midst of India’s mammoth parliamentary election is unlikely to have any impact on Prime Minister Modi’s electoral fortunes one way or the other.

The more damning details of the alleged plot have already been known since December last year but there are some specific  pointers that are potentially troublesome for New Delhi. For instance, this passage: “U.S. spy agencies have more tentatively assessed that Modi’s national security adviser, Ajit Doval, was probably aware of RAW’s plans to kill Sikh activists, but officials emphasized that no smoking gun proof has emerged.”

It is not altogether inconceivable that a plot to assassinate a U.S. citizen, albeit of Indian origin, on U.S. soil, which is unprecedented in its audacity and brazenness, could not have been executed without the highest echelons in India’s intelligence establishment being at least broadly informed of if not involved in.

The passage of four months since the superseding indictment by the Southern District New York (SDNY) identified as CC-1 and Indian government employee “working together with others in India and elsewhere” has not materially affected India-US relations.

That CC-1 has now been revealed to be Yadav is only a matter of detail. The SDNY was careful enough not to mention RAW in the indictment then.  

The indictment had focused on Nikhil Gupta, an Indian national charged with plotting to assassinate Pannun. Gupta, who according to the superseding indictment describes himself as someone involved in “international narcotics and weapons trafficking”, may be a relatively minor player by himself but he could possess information that could be damning for higher-ups within the Indian establishment.

It described “CC-1” as formerly affiliated with Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) and later becoming a “Senior Field Officer” with responsibilities in “Security Management” and “Intelligence”. CC-1 is also described as someone who received training in “battle craft” and “weapons.”

At the time of the indictment Indica News had reached out to find out if Gupta was held in custody in New York but was told by an official that he would not comment beyond what the indictment contains. The official also declined to answer if CC-1 had any affiliation with India’s foreign intelligence agency Research and Analysis Wing, better known as RAW on the same grounds.

The fact that CC-1 allegedly authorized a total payment of $100,000 for a hit, according to the indictment, of which $15,000 was paid to a U.S. undercover agent, is both problematic and curious. It is problematic because it underlined a conspiracy. It is curious because it is hard to explain how CC-1 via Gupta knew whom to contact for a contract killing and how Gupta ended up contacting an undercover agent to make the advance payment.

The indictment showed an actual photo of the money being given in a car from one hand to another hand. They look like 100-dollar bills but the one held by the apparent receiving hand looks like a dollar bill.

The essence of the indictment, which goes into great detail to explain the plot, is that CC-1, allegedly Yadav, according to the Post, contracted Gupta to find a hitman in New York and promised him that in return his troubles with the Indian police would be over. “On or about May 12, 2023, CC-1 notified GUPTA that his criminal case “has already been taken care of,” and that “nobody from Guj(a)rat police is calling.” On or about May 23, 2023, CC-1 again assured Gupta that CC-1 had “spoke[n] with the boss about your Gujarat [case],” that it was “all clear,” and “nobody will ever bother you again.” CC-1 further offered to arrange a meeting between GUPTA and a “DCP,” which is an acronym used in India for Deputy Commissioner of Police,” the indictment says.

It is unknown which “boss” CC-1 is talking about in ending Gupta’s case with the Gujarat police. However, the fact that it mentions Gujarat, the home state of both Prime Minister Modi as well as Home Minister Amit Shah would not be lost on New Delhi.

That was a very specific claim and fraught with serious problems for at least Indian officials at relatively senior levels. It also has the potential to be used as leverage by Washington with New Delhi.

As it happens in such plots driven by any intelligence agency or operatives in the world, there ought to be plausible deniability built into to ensure that in case things go wrong, their origin cannot be traced back to the highest levels of the government or intelligence. To that extent, it should not be surprising if CC-1 becomes expendable in terms of his direct links to anyone of great consequence in the Indian government.

The indictment is quite explosive and has significant implications for US-India relations. However, given the US’s murky history in such matters and, more importantly, the fact that Washington needs New Delhi on its side in dealing with much larger and more serious global challenges emanating from China’s undisguised maneuvers as America’s only rival internationally, this case may eventually not amount to much. It may become a sword that Washington would keep hanging in its bilateral relations.

There are many remarkable passages in the indictment but this one is particularly telling. “As they plotted the murder of the Victim, Gupta specifically and repeatedly instructed the CS (confidential source) not to carry out the assassination during anticipated engagements between high level government officials from the United States and India. For example, on or about June 6, 2023, on an audio call, Gupta instructed the CS that “we need to calm down everything (for) 10 days” because of such engagements scheduled to occur over the ensuing weeks. Gupta explained that, given the Victim’s public profile as an activist, there could be protests in the wake of his death, which could lead to “political things,” referring to geopolitical fallout if the Victim were assassinated on U.S. soil during those planned meetings. Gupta added that after the planned engagements, there would be “more jobs, more jobs,” referring to more targeted killings like that of the Victim to be carried out in the future.”

Randhir Jaiswal, spokesperson for India’s Ministry of External Affairs, said of the Post story in a formal statement, “The report in question makes unwarranted and unsubstantiated imputations on a serious matter. There is ongoing investigation of the High Level Committee set up by the Government of India to look into the security concerns shared by the US government on networks of organized criminals, terrorists and others. Speculative and irresponsible comments on it are not helpful.”

Given that the Modi government is focused almost entirely on the parliamentary election, there is no prospect of any substantive action in the matter until after the election result is out on June 4 or 5.

New Delhi would not have been surprised by the Post story because as the newspaper pointed out, “White House officials warned the Modi government this month that The Post was close to publishing an investigation that would reveal new details about the case. It did so without notifying The Post.”