The US state department recently told a court that the Saudi Arabian crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, should have immunity in a lawsuit over the murder of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi, it portrayed its argument as a legal and not a moral position. By way of evidence, it pointed to a rogues’ gallery of foreign leaders previously afforded similar protection. Nestling between Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe, who, it was claimed, assassinated political rivals, and Congo’s Joseph Kabila, whose security detail was accused of assaulting protesters in Washington, was India’s Narendra Modi.

Indian Prime Minister Narinder Modi’s name in such a list is of significance and It is a reminder that while New Delhi basks in its diplomatic success at recent G20 and Cop27 summits, and more significantly assuming role of G20 group presidency India might find the international environment less accommodating if Mr Modi and his Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata party (BJP) continue to stir up hatred to win elections in Gujarat scheduled for dec 1 and December 5. America’s strategic partnership with India cannot be completely insulated from domestic political issues. Mr Modi’s failure, as chief minister of Gujarat, to prevent anti-Muslim riots in 2002 that left hundreds dead saw him denied a US visa, until he became Indian prime minister.

The message clearly points out that the ban had not been withdrawn, but suspended. India as per American stance is viewed as a geopolitical counterweight to China and, in many ways, an indispensable actor on the world stage. President Biden’s administration presently seems to be less tolerant than Mr Trump’s administration as far as Modi’s and his government’s attempts to remould Indian democracy so that Hindus become constitutionally pre-eminent, with Indian minorities being pushed to as second-class citizens. Last week, the US Commission on International Religious Freedom accused Indian government’s continuous engagement in crackdown on civil society and dissent”, and “religious freedom violations”, in a systematic manner, and imprisonment of journalists, lawyers, human rights activists, academics, political leaders, religious minorities and others critical of Indian government policies. United States state department which periodically releases a list of countries being watched for religious freedom and other issues concerning governance designated India as a Country of Particular Concern (CPC). The Indian foreign ministry hit back at “biased and inaccurate observations”. Indian Foreign Ministry spokesperson criticised and termed the U.S. state department’s comparison of immunity given to Indian Prime Minister Narinder Modi since 2014 with the legal immunity now given to Saudi Crown Prince and PM Mohammed Bin Salman as not relevant necessary or contextual. The State elections in Gujarat beginning on Thursday, weeks after BJP ministers approved the premature release of 11 men convicted of rape and murder of Muslim women and children during the riots, Bilkis Bano case during 2002 Muslim carnage. During the campaign trail last Friday, India’s home minister Amit Shah claimed that in 2002 troublemakers had been “taught a lesson”. This sounded like a signal to Hindu mobs that they could do as they pleased. Indian foreign ministry spokesman also took aim at the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) for issuing a “Country Update “ that accused the government of” engaging in or tolerating systematic, ongoing, and egregious religious freedom violations “. Indian official further added that India has seen the biased and inaccurate observations about India by the USCIRF and their tendency to consistently misrepresent facts shows a lack of understanding of india its constitutional framework, plurality and robust democratic system.

US state department principal deputy spokesperson Vedant Patel when asked about granting immunity to Saudi Crown Prince and Prime Minister in regard to Jamaal khassogi case matter had said this wasn’t the first time that the US had done this and that the same had been applied to a number of heads of state previously, including Modi. The US had placed PM Modi on a visa ban in 2005 over allegations that his government did nothing to stop the 2002 Muslim carnage in Gujarat as Chief Minister. Prime Minister Narendra Modi was given the same kind of protection from prosecution in the US that was recently afforded to Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman This is not the first time that the United States has done this. It is a longstanding and consistent line of effort. It has been applied to a number of heads of state previously. Some examples: President Aristide in Haiti in 1993, President Mugabe in Zimbabwe in 2001, and President Kabila in the DRC in 2018.

Until his election as Prime Minister in 2014, the US maintained that there is “no change in its policy”, even after the United Kingdom and the European Union ended their boycott. Salman crown prince of Saudi Arabia was granted immunity on last Thursday, a White House spokesperson said, according to Reuters: “This is a legal determination made by the State Department under longstanding and well-established principles of customary international law. It has nothing to do with the merits of the case.”

Indian spokesperson on Thursday conveyed its displeasure over the United States citing the example of the immunity it had given to Prime Minister Narendra Modi from legal proceedings in America in 2014 New Delhi subtly indicated that the US State Department’s principal deputy spokesperson Vedant Patel could have avoided dragging the name of Modi while defending the move to grant the immunity to Saudi Arabian crown prince from lawsuits filed by murdered journalist Jamal Khashoggi’s fiancé Hatice Cengiz in a US court. Khashoggi, a well-known critic of the Saudi Arabian royal family, was murdered at the consulate of the kingdom in Istanbul in October 2018. The US intelligence agencies in November 2018 concluded that the journalist was murdered on orders from the MBS himself. The recent move by the Biden Administration to grant immunity to Mohammed bin Salman triggered protests in the US, particularly from human rights activists. After Modi took over as the prime minister of India in May 2014, the then US administration of President Barack Obama had lifted the ban on him. The Obama Administration had also granted immunity to the prime minister of India from any lawsuit in the US.