What TV doesn't, print can't; we deliver.
What TV doesn't, print can't; we deliver.
The recent report by the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) has sparked significant controversy, particularly in India. The report, which accuses India of increasing abuses against religious minorities, has been dismissed by the Indian Ministry of External Affairs as biased and politically motivated. A critical aspect that has come under scrutiny is the involvement of Pakistan-American citizens and Pakistan-origin individuals with known biases against India in the development of this report.
USCIRF is an independent, bipartisan federal government entity established by the U.S. Congress to monitor, analyze, and report on religious freedom abroad. Its mandate includes making policy recommendations to the President, the Secretary of State, and Congress. However, the integrity of its reports is paramount to its credibility and effectiveness. When the composition of the panel developing these reports includes individuals with potential conflicts of interest, the objectivity of the findings is inevitably called into question.
The report has been curated by Pakistani-Americans from the pool of “South Asian experts” formerly having served in the US State Department’s Office of Pakistan Affairs. These “policy analysts” have been groomed as experts on India by Pakistani diplomats. Does the USCIRF expect India to legitimately recognise a report compiled by individuals with roots in Pakistan?
Pakistan’s historical and ongoing geopolitical tensions with India are well-documented. The two nations have been at odds over various issues, including territorial disputes, cross-border terrorism, and differing political ideologies. Given this context, the impartiality of Pakistani panel members in assessing India’s religious freedom conditions is highly questionable.
Bias in such reports can have far-reaching consequences. It not only undermines the credibility of the USCIRF but also affects international perceptions and diplomatic relations. A report perceived as biased can be dismissed outright by the accused nation, as seen in India’s response. This dismissal can lead to a lack of constructive dialogue and hinder efforts to address genuine human rights concerns.
For USCIRF to maintain its credibility, it must ensure transparency in its processes and the composition of its panels. The selection of panel members should be based on their expertise and impartiality, free from any potential conflicts of interest. Transparency in these processes would help build trust and ensure that the reports are taken seriously by the international community.
