6. Zahra Niazi-Bihar-Reject Modi-War-Oped thumbnail-November-2025-APP

India is set for a high-stakes electoral battle as Bihar heads to the polls on November 6 and 11 – a contest that could serve as a key test of Modi’s militarised electoral strategy.

Bihar, with its 243 constituencies and vast population, is regarded as a political bellwether and remains the only North Indian state where the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) depends heavily on alliance formation to retain power. However, the alliance’s leader now faces severe anti-incumbency sentiments among voters, fuelled by frustration over governance and growing concerns about his age and fitness as he seeks a tenth term as Chief Minister. Meanwhile, a new party led by a former election planner has joined the political race, with surveys showing the main opposition leader as the most preferred choice for the next Chief Minister, followed by the new political entrant. Overall, public dissatisfaction with the BJP, particularly over economic issues and corruption, has been rising, according to a recent Mood of the Nation survey.

For Modi, therefore, the contest is far from easy, and the stakes are high. Against this backdrop, anti-Pakistan rhetoric and militaristic posturing serve as convenient electoral placards to rally public support and deflect attention from governance failures.

The pattern became evident soon after the Pahalgam incident, when Modi issued his unusual threat in English – to avenge the killings – from Bihar, rather than from any other Indian state. Nearly three weeks after Operation Sindoor, during another visit to Bihar, he declared that the promise had been fulfilled. In subsequent addresses in Bihar, while lauding Operation Sindoor as a success, he emphasised that he had taken theresolve of the Operation from the land of Bihar,’ and the world had seen the resolve getting fulfilled.

As the elections draw nearer, military officials have become prominent messengers of the ruling government’s rhetoric. The timing of the recent militaristic speeches by senior Indian military officials – portraying Operation Sindoor as a success, signalling readiness for further escalation, and closely aligning with the Defence Minister’s remarks – suggests that a coordinated effort driven by the government’s domestic political motives is underway.

However, while the BJP may hope this strategy can rally voters, it can – and should – instead become the very reason for its inability to secure a decisive mandate. Bihar is ranked among India’s poorest states, and for the population, joblessness, migration, increasing debts, and loss of agricultural revenue continue to be the central issues. Of these, joblessness has remained the predominant concern, with Bihar ranking second in terms of the number of unemployed people. Even a small redirection of the resources spent on military adventurism and maintaining inflated defence budgets towards development could have helped address these central concerns. As just one illustration, even one per cent of India’s USD 77.4 billion military budget, if allocated to the Ministry of Labour and Employment, could lead to a more than six-fold increase in the latter’s current budgetary share of USD 115 million, allowing for major progress in addressing the unemployment challenges.

However, while the socio-economic trade-offs of militarism are real and significant, only when strong voices challenge the glorification of military adventurism and call attention to these trade-offs can people see that it undermines, rather than serves, their interests. The idea that nationalism is synonymous with jingoism and taking active action against Pakistan has long been injected into the population’s bloodstream. As just one manifestation of this, when an Indian social media user recently called for cooperation and peace between the two nations, the post attracted a spree of hateful comments. The subsequent post highlighted this reaction, noting that around 95 per cent of the hateful comments came from Indians, while almost all Pakistanis were positive and supportive of the idea.

For the progressive Indian voices, including the opposition, this is not only an opportunity but a moral responsibility. Modi’s ability to secure a decisive mandate in Bihar – the first election after Operation Sindoor – would reinforce the notion that militaristic rhetoric and adventurism can win votes. But if Bihar rejects this politics, it will send a different message: that war rhetoric cannot distract voters from real issues. If it does so, through both words and actions, it will be remembered as the state that took the first decisive step in the direction of breaking the politics of war. The writer is a Research Associate at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad. The article was first published in South Asia Times. She can be reached at: [email protected]


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The Cover-up: IAF Narrative of the May 2025 Air Battle

Even after one year since the India-Pakistan May war of 2025, the Indian discourse regarding Operation Sindoor remains uncertain under its pretence of restraint. The Pahalgam attack on 22 April, which killed 26 people, triggered an escalatory spiral. New Delhi quickly accused Pakistan-linked elements, while Islamabad refuted the allegation and demanded an independent investigation. On 7 May, India launched attacks deep inside Pakistan under what it later termed as Operation Sindoor. The political motive was intended to turn the crisis into coercive signalling by shifting the blame onto the enemy and projecting a sense of military superiority.
This episode, however, began to fray immediately as war seldom follows the intended script. Within minutes PAF shot down 7 IAF aircraft including 4 Rafales. On 8 May, Reuters reported that at least two Indian aircraft were shot down by a Pakistani J-10C, while the local government sources reported other aircraft crashes in Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir

Read More »

Why the IAF’s Post-Sindoor Spending Surge is a Sign of Panic

After Operation Sindoor, India is spending billions of dollars on new weapons. This is being taken by many people as an indication of military prowess. It is not. This rush to procure weapons is in fact an acknowledgement that the Air Force in India had failed to do what it was meant to do. The costly jets and missiles that India had purchased over the years failed to yield the promised results.

Sindoor was soon followed by India in sealing the gaps which the operation had exposed. It was reported that Indian Air Force (IAF) is looking to speed up its purchases of more than 7 billion USD. This will involve other Rafale fighter jets with India already ordering 26 more Rafales to the Navy in 2024 at an estimated cost of about 3.9 billion USD. India is also seeking long-range standoff missiles, Israeli loitering munitions and increased drone capabilities. Special financial powers of the Indian military were activated to issue emergency procurement orders. The magnitude and rate of these purchases speak volumes.

Indian media and defence analysts have over the years considered the Rafale as a game changer. When India purchased 36 Rafales aircrafts at an approximate cost of 8.7 billion USD, analysts vowed that the aircraft would provide India with air superiority over Pakistan. Operation Sindoor disproved all those allegations. Indian aircraft did not even fly in Pakistani airspace when the fighting started. India solely depended on standoff weapons that were launched at a safe distance. The air defence system of Pakistan, comprising of the HQ-9 surface-to-air missile system and its own fighters, stood its ground.

Read More »

May 2025: Mosaic Warfare and the Myth of Centralised Air Power

Visualise a modern-day Air Force commander sitting in the operations room, miles away from the combat zone, overseeing every friendly and enemy aircraft and all assets involved in the campaign. In a split second, he can task a fighter, reposition a drone, and authorise a strike. In today’s promising technological era, he does not even need an operations room; a laptop on his desktop will suffice. The situation looks promising as it offers efficiency, precision, and control. The term used for such operational control is ‘centralisation’, which has been made possible with advanced networking, integrating space, cyber, surveillance, artificial intelligence, and seamless communication, enabling a single commander to manage an entire campaign from a single node. Centralised command and control, championed by the Western air forces and then adopted by many others, has thus been seen as a pinnacle of modern military power.
The concept of centralisation, enabled by state-of-the-art networking, may seem promising, but it is nothing more than a myth.

Read More »