demographers reckon india has just overtaken china to become the world's most populous nation. its economy is growing at 6%—plus per year despite global headwinds, and its leader is a populist who appears to be popular. so should indians be feeling good about the state of their nation? well, my guest, shashi tharoor, is both an opposition politician and an historian. can prime minister modi credibly claim to be making india great again? shashi tharoor, welcome to hardtalk.

thank you. good to see you again, stephen. you just heard me talk about india's current place in the world, the most populous nation, a growing economy, a stable government. would you agree that india right now is in a good place? it's not in a bad place in overall terms. that is that it's a country, it has always been, i think, a country to be reckoned with on the world stage, but now it's number one in global population, it's number three in purchasing power parity terms in the overall gdp, number five in dollar terms. it's a country of some substance. it does have free and fair elections. every once in a while we sort of overturn state governments, so we haven't yet been able to overturn the central government. so it counts for a great

deal on the world stage. and i must say that when you look at things like technology, it's done rather well for a so—called developing country. it's got some very fine talents. we seem to have exported an awful lot of ceos around the world who are heading multinational corporations and so on. and the new head of the world bank is an american of indian descent, born in india. so there's a lot that shows that india continues to make an outsized impact on the world. what an extraordinary string of positives. and here you sit as a senior member of the congress opposition party in india. and does it stick in your throat to a certain extent to acknowledge all of that, given that we have had two terms of narendra modi? he remains, according to the opinion surveys in india, still extremely popular, and it looks very likely that he will run and win a third term next year. this is all deeply problematic for you. well, as an opposition mp, it is somewhat problematic for me, except that, in fact, the foundations for much of what i'm celebrating were actually laid by other governments, including, principally, governments led by the congress party. politics isn't that sort of business. when modi's been in power

for two terms and readying for a third, i don't think the people are going to think, let's give all the credit to the government that came before it. not all the credit. i think all the credit goes to the people of india. but the fact is that the foundations were laid and have been built upon. but the other problem i have as a member of the opposition is we have wonderful free and fair elections, but how the country is governed between those elections falls somewhat short of the democratic ideal. and that's something that we are concerned about. and then there are even matters relating to the economy that we can't be terribly happy about. there's the highest recorded unemployment of all time since they started keeping figures in the �*30s and �*40s, which have happened on the watch of the present government. and when you look at the fact that a number of crucial indicators haven't moved upward, it does suggest that the macroeconomic picture relies heavily on progress in a few areas like high—tech, and perhaps infrastructure development, which have been going well, and not enough

on the kinds of things that make life easier for the common man and woman of ordinary parlance. isn't one key problem, though, that mr modi has a big idea, a proposition? i guess you could sum it up with that word, hindutva, or the brand of hindu nationalism that he's brought into politics over a decade and more. you say of that approach to politics that it represents a, quote, "toxin injected into the veins of indian society." now, that proposition of yours has been, and continues to be, thoroughly rejected by a clear majority of the indian people. i'm not so sure that it's that that they're rejecting. i don't think that the indian people particularly want to be bigoted or intolerant. and it sits ill with both our social practices over decades and with the majority faith of hinduism, which is essentially an inclusive faith that celebrates diversity and pluralism within it and outside it. what's happened, however,

is that that message has been mixed up with other factors. in the 2019 elections, for example, the attack by the pakistani terrorists on an army convoy that killed a0 soldiers enabled the ruling party to convert the election into a national security election, and they won a thumping majority with that. ijust would like to know what the congress party intends to offer the indian people as a response to the hindu nationalism that is now well—established. what we see across the country are state and local officials working in the name of the bjp who are doing things like banning girls wearing veils in schools, they're banning the muslim call to prayer in the town square, they're tightening restrictions on cattle slaughter. they are essentially trying to tell india there is a hindu supremacy. would you roll all of those measures back? the congress party remains committed to a pluralist india,

to respecting all faiths. the way in which we've basically run the country for 60—odd years out of the 75 of india's independent existence has been by leaving well enough alone, by letting people be who they are, as long as they don't interfere with other people's enjoyment of who they are. but my question was quite simple and direct. would we roll it back? roll back all of those local and state measures, which, according to the muslim community, are deeply discriminatory against them? well, in many parts of northern india, the hindi—speaking belt, the ban on cow slaughter, for example, is popular. i'm not sure that there's any commitment by any party to roll those laws back, but i think the kind of vigilantism that has been encouraged by the present government would certainly get no official support. in fact, it would probably be cracked down upon. in other words, there would be some laws that people would have to respect. ours is a country where there are still a number of states —

mine, for example, where you can eat beef in peace. and there are a number of states, particularly across the hindi belt — "the cow belt" as it's irreverently described — where you can't. and where you can't, i think you have to respect the local laws. that's something people will have to accept. now, you said to me at the very beginning of this interview, you said, you know, "i am proud of india's democracy." freedom house, one us—based organisation that assesses international democratic standards, now defines india as a partly free democracy. the world press freedom index has seen india slip down the measure to 161st out of 180. it's actually 11 places behind pakistan. are you confident that with national elections coming next year, you, as a candidate, all of your fellows in the opposition, are going to be able to fight in a free and fair election? well, there are some, certainly, in the opposition who believe that some

of the electoral machines have been rigged. i don't think we've ever been able to produce any convincing proof of that. but i'm thinking of the information and media landscape, as well. so the challenge is the election will be free and fair, but it won't necessarily have a level playing field because, as you rightly say, information, the ecosystem of the free press has been somewhat eroded through a combination of the media being cajoled and cudgelled into seeing things the way the ruling party wants. the other challenge is, as i said, what happens between elections, where we are seeing the autonomy of a number of institutions severely diluted, and we are also seeing an atmosphere of, to put it mildly, intimidation with the tax authorities, for example, running rampant against dissenting organisations or even dissenting newspapers. over the course of the last few years, i've spoken to several indian journalists, brave journalists who are committed to independent investigative journalism. one of them, rana ayyub, who for years has suffered

harassment, intimidation as a result of the journalistic work she's done. she feels, clearly, that the indian political culture has not offered her staunch defence. do you feel that you and your colleagues in your party have really stood up for the rights of independentjournalists over the last few years? well, i'd like to think so in my own case, and i've certainly spoken up for rana. when she published her book on gujarat, i was one of the voices that spoke up for her at the time. and the fact that she still writes, still is quoted, still is very much there, is a good sign. i am concerned about the fact that in addition to the examples you mentioned, the varieties of democracy institute in sweden, the v—dem institute, has described india as an electoral autocracy. that is, the elections are largely free and fair, but once people are elected, they conduct themselves autocratically. and that's not a healthy sign.

the government... but remember, stephen, we are a large federal country and the bjp doesn't rule a majority of the states of our country. and even when they did, they lost elections in states they were ruling and now there are opposition parties in a majority of our states, in charge of those states. so it's not as if we are some sort of one—party republic masquerading as a democracy. democracy manifests itself at the state level as well. and it's been for us very important that we have the freedom to challenge the authority of the ruling party in our 28 states. isn't one of the truths about narendra modi not only that he has a formula, he's found a formula which has delivered him electoral success, but he's also been extremely lucky in the quality of his opponents? well, that has been said. you in the congress party have failed to provide vision, leadership, coherence over the past few years. and many in india would argue you're still not providing it today. well, i think we'd beg to differ on the vision part. i think we've always had a great deal of clarity about what we stand for.

so what is congress's big idea today? well, the big idea is to preserve the india that is a place that celebrates diversity, that ensures everyone, however humble their origins, three square meals a day and the prospect of a better life, and at the same time doesn't discriminate against people because of their birth in a particularfaith or the language they speak or the part of the country they belong to. so that vision is very, very clearly articulated. it's a vision of inclusiveness and socialjustice, which is what the congress party has stood for for decades. yeah, in essence, you're saying, "we haven't really changed at all." and the truth is... that's true. ..still the shadow of the gandhi dynasty hangs over the party. rahul gandhi isn't your official president or leader at the moment, but... he is the most influential leader. ..he�*s the most influential man in the party. and your actual leader, mr kharge, is 80 years old and known to essentially be deeply loyal to sonia and rahul gandhi. so where's the change? where's the dynamism in the congress party? well, it's a difficult

question for me to answer, because i'm the one who ran against mr kharge in the party's internal election as the advocate of change, and i was rather soundly trounced. so this is your invitation from me, to be very honest. why is the congress party so stuck, so averse to real change? no, but you see, the issue at the moment is that change is coming from the other side. in other words, we've got india being changed into something it hasn't been. i've talked about the injection of bigotry and the doctrine of hatred into our society. and you've cited a number of serious examples against a particular minority community, our largest minority, which don't sit well at all with those of us of the congress persuasion, or, broadly speaking, the liberal secular... but you're not actually engaging with my question. yes, india's changed in so many different ways over the past 20 years. and so fighting to preserve... the congress party hasn't changed at all. its leader going into the next election looks like he's going to be 80 — nothing wrong with being 80 years old — but it's hardly sending a message to the indian

people that we as a party can find new dynamic leaders of the next generation to take india forward with new ideas. i think mr kharge has a lot of respect in the party and across the country. he's been a very senior leader for a very long time. he comes from a humble background, a dalit family, and at the same time he's somebody who is fluent in many languages, knows the country very well, has led the party in both the lower house and the upper house at different times, so his credentials are impeccable, i don't disagree. the fact that we do need to blood young leaders is beyond question, and i think that will have to happen sooner rather than later. yeah. so when experts, people who look at india from the outside and try to figure out what's going on, when they say this, like milan vaishnav, who's a senior fellow at carnegie... i know milan. so milan says this, "the truth is the liberal, secular vision of the congress party has fallen out of favour,

the party's top—down culture," and maybe that's what we're talking about here, "is out of sync with the masses in india today." there i do agree, that was one of the points in my internal manifesto, as it were, for the party. i said, "we've got to end the high command culture, decentralise authority, empower the grassroots." i still hope that some of that will happen, even if i'm not the standard bearer of that within the party. it's something which i've stood for with a lot of conviction because it reflects a lot of what i've heard in the party. what about the lesson of turkey when it comes to trying to challenge a very strong authoritarian... get the opposition parties together? get all the opposition parties together. it didn't quite work in turkey, but they got darn close. they got darn close, and we intend to get closer still. there's an opposition party conclave scheduled for the 23rd ofjune, convened by the chief minister of bihar, mr nitish kumar, who doesn't belong to our party but to an allied party. and something like 20 opposition parties have confirmed that they will attend.

right, but does congress demand a guarantee that it will be the lead? it doesn't, and in my view, it should not. i think that when the time comes, that is when you've actually agreed upon a common minimum programme, a common manifesto, and you have in as many constituencies as possible, not all of them, but perhaps a good two thirds of the constituencies, one agreed opposition candidate to take on the bjp, then you have the good prospect of a positive result. and as we see in parliamentary systems, let the victorious coalition choose its leader. now, i don't want to just talk to you as an active politician, i want to tap into your vision as an historian as well... an amateur historian, more of a writer. whatever. you've just written a book which profiles, focuses on, one great leader of the independence era who happened to be a dalit, untouchable. that's right. he came from the most humble and desperately poor beginnings. absolutely. his name is bhimrao ramji ambedakar. now, you use him as an exemplar of what india should be,

how he came from the bottom... that's right. ..he got to the top. through the dint of education, hard work and a faith in constitutional solutions to the problems. and what you seem to be saying is that, "you know what? india can be a society, and is becoming a society, where caste no longer matters." i would put it to you, on the contrary, it's a society where caste still matters... far too much. ..profoundly. no, i agree with that. in fact, the problem is that whereas people like nehru and ambedkar of that generation would probably have thought that caste would fade away, it instead got more entrenched because it was used as an instrument for political mobilisation. now, there are parties who openly campaign on the basis of caste appeal, and we're seeing as a result that the politics of identity, rather than the politics of performance, have overtaken much of india's political landscape. do you think you really understand india today? 0h, ido. when it comes to either

the importance of hindutva and hindu nationalism or whether it comes to the importance of caste, because you said this not long ago, you said, "i've never practised the caste system. i've never believed in it. i never ask someone what their caste is, even when someone wants to come and apply for a job as my cook." now, to many people's ears, that's going to sound like you're a member of an elite who really is out of touch with the reality of what happens in your own country. the fact that prejudice exists is known in every society, ijust don't happen to have it. but i was a son of a product of the nationalist generation who dropped his own caste name in college. we never mentioned caste or religion when my friends came home to play. but a member of a relatively exclusive indian elite. no, he wasn't elite, he was a young man in a village when he did all that. and many, many people have grown up from humble origins, as he did, to achieve, indeed, a status that might be described as very privileged. but the fact is that while caste blindness is possible, i must admit that caste blindness comes across to many as an

admission of privilege. a dalit girl once wrote to me saying that, "i couldn't ever grow up being unaware of my caste, cos as a dalit, i faced discrimination because of my caste all the time." and that certainly was an eye—opener. so, yes, caste blindness is not yet an option for those in india who suffer discrimination. but dr ambedkar wrote in the world's first and farthest—reaching affirmative action programme, "we guarantee spots in governmentjobs, in universities and medical colleges, and even in parliament and the state assemblies, for people from the dalit community and the aboriginal community," the adivasis, the scheduled castes and tribes, as they're called, and that's something which has enabled them to achieve opportunities in power. now, another perspective you have is that of a former senior un official. you worked for the un the best part of what, two decades? three, 29 years. wow! so what do you think it is doing to india's international standing, the way in which the modi government is continuing to insist on a very warm

relationship with russia despite the invasion of ukraine, and actually deepening trade and economic ties to the point where india is now being accused of essentially using its trade ties with russia to make vast profits on trading in oil and diesel? well, india is not making the profits, the oil companies are, but that's another matter. they're making these profits by refining oil in india and selling it to the us and the uk. so, unfortunately, the cynicism involved in all of this extends beyond india. india's acting now... would you, like mr modi has done, would you remain non—aligned, as he puts it? would you refuse to vote with the us and its western allies when it comes to condemning...? stephen, you may not know that i'm the one mp in the indian parliament who opposed the indian stand on ukraine. i know what you've said as a person. but i also know that your party... my party did not... ..leader, mr rahul gandhi, has said that he supports modi's stand and that he,

too, would not be voting alongside the united states. we all support national interests as the overriding concern, but i think the national interest would have been compatible with conveying to the russians that a set of principles we've stood for for 70—odd years, including state sovereignty, the inviolability of borders, the inadmissibility of the use of force to settle international disputes, that these principles matter to us enough. but that's principles, what about national interest? because mr gandhi, in essence the boss of your party, said just a few days ago, "i would have a very similar stance to the government of india on russia. at the end of the day, we have to look out for our interests." and by that he meant our trading and economic interests. so would you actually cut those deepening trade ties with russia? no, i wouldn't cut the ties, but they wouldn't prevent me from taking a stand of principle if a friendly government does something wrong. so you want to have your cake and eat it? absolutely.

that's what we're being accused of doing, even now. but then you talk to me of principles. well, yes, you stand up for principles. so having your cake and eating it is your principle? no. come on, stephen. the point i'm trying to say is that we can say that this is wrong. we can call a spade a spade. but at the moment, what's happening is that we're not using the word war, we're not using the word invasion, we're not calling out russia, and at the same time, we're trading with them. whereas, if we say, "look, we are willing to trade with you because it's in our interest as well as yours, but we do think this is wrong and you need to reverse this," that's a somewhat different and more principled position. it is likely over the coming years, india's going to have to make some very big strategic choices. choices, yeah. i mean, you've got china... sitting on our border and nibbling away at our territory. ..which you don't trust. and you also have the united states, which you've had a somewhat complicated relationship with for many years. it's in pretty good shape at the moment. in the long run, do you believe that india's destiny is to develop a much closer, warmer relationship with washington or to maintain

as a strong partner in the brics organisation with china and russia? no, look, this is again a case perhaps that you're going to turn around and say you want to have it both ways. but india has traditionally said we're going to preserve our rights to do both, our strategic autonomy matters to us. it becomes increasingly difficult, particularly at crunch times like this, when, for clearly obvious reasons, india is going to have to make some choices. so at the moment we are in brics, and in fact, we are a joint partner with the chinese in the new development bank of brics with the same level of contributions. and we are in the quad with the us, which is a very important strategic partnership of india, australia, japan and the us. we also have partnerships with the us, for example, in what's called the i2u2, which is the us, the uae, india and israel, in west asia. so you've got relationships in both west asia and east asia with what you would consider western countries, western

inclined countries, but you also have a role not just in the brics, but also we are current chairman of the shanghai cooperation 0rganisation, which is indeed an organisation set up by russia and china, so we've had it both ways. it sounds to me like your foreign policy differs very little indeed from mr modi's. well, i mean, on this, he's following a path that our party laid down all these years ago. so, yes, we're not going to dissent from a rule that we created. but i think you were hinting that the time may come when we'll have to make a choice that we haven't needed to make so far. and we have to be prepared and understand and weigh the consequences of the choices we'll make. right now, we don't need to make that choice because we are able to work within both sets of entities. that's the way the world is today. sadly, we're out of time. shashi tharoor, i thank you very much forjoining me on hardtalk. thank you. thank you, stephen.

hello there. flaming june continued on sunday with temperatures and eastern parts of england over 30 degrees. not only was it hot, but very human. that heat and humidity will get pushed away by that weather front which has brought some rain earlier on and following him behind that, we are going to find some clear and fresh air coming in from the atlantic. now, on saturday knight, temperatures in highland scotland fell no lower than 20 degrees and a minimum temperature in merseyside was 19 celsius. it will be much more comfortable as we head into early monday with temperatures perhaps down as low as single figures in scotland and northern ireland. we start quite sunny on monday, but quickly the cloud will bubble up and we will find showers

developing northern ireland in northern england, chance of showers for the south much reduced. temperatures could be as high as 22 at 23 degrees in the southeast. 0f could be as high as 22 at 23 degrees in the southeast. of course, lack of lower than it was on sunday and for the north typically 18—20. a cooler, fresher westerly wind will be blowing. all our weather will be coming in from the atlantic. more of a difference coming our way as we move into tuesday. that is going to bring more cloudy and rainy, mainly for northern and western areas we will be in a warm sector overnight now, we're going to be in a warm sector as we head overnight and it's overnight t and it's going to be very warm, actually, ithink, overnight into wednesday morning for southeastern parts of the uk. the warm sector is the area between two weather fronts and so we're going to start

with a lot of cloud around on wednesday. the second weather front, the cold front here, is this band of rain. that's going to clear away from scotland and northern ireland. sunshine and showers and cooler air following on behind. the rain band pushes into england and wales, dry until very late in the day across eastern england and those temperatures could be up as high as 25, maybe 26 degrees. that's probably going to be as warm as it's going to get over the week ahead. that weather front then moves away and we're all into cooler and fresher air as we move into thursday once again. and that probably means some sunshine. the odd shower in the southeast of england but otherwise most of the wet weather coming in from the atlantic will be in the northwest of scotland. for many it's going to be a dry day on thursday, and those temperatures near average, i suppose, for this time of the year, around 20, 22 degrees or so. as we head towards the end of the week this is the weather pattern, low to the north, high to the south, and this is the jet stream which is going to pile in more weatherfronts from off the atlantic and that's going to bring more rain to northern and western areas of the uk, more cloud coming in to england and wales but the southeast still looks dry and here

temperatures will be up to around 23 degrees or so but again we're going to be struggling at around 18 in the rain in the central belt of scotland. now, it's worth looking at the rainfall accumulation over the next few days because whilst it's going to be unsettled and there is rain in the forecast, as you can see, where we've got hosepipe bans in the southeast there really isn't going to be any rain to speak of at all. it will be much wetter for the north and west. and that story is likely to continue as we look further ahead for the outlook. a low pressure to the north, high pressure to the south, but that low pressure isn't really going to go anywhere, it's just going to spiral around in the same sort of spot, it'll be accompanied by some brisk winds at times and it'll keep wetter weather across more northern and some western parts of the uk but towards the southeast it's not going to be very wet at all, there'll be some sunshine, temperatures near average, the heat, the humidity is not set to return.

welcome to newsday. reporting live from singapore, i'm monica miller. the headlines... christine dawood, wife of shahzada dawood and mother of 19—year—old suleman dawood, who both died in the titan submersible — speaks exclusively to the bbc.

when we passed the