Are Indian Americans Failing Their Motherland?
The esteemed Shashi Tharoor, in a recent article in The Indian Express, called out the Indian diaspora in the U.S. for not doing enough to oppose Trump’s latest policy assaults on India—such as steep tariffs and a massive hike in H-1B visa fees. Suhag A. Shukla, co-founder and executive director of the Hindu American Foundation (HAF), fired back with a rebuttal published in The Print.
This debate about Indian American political engagement has many layers and demands more nuance than either Tharoor or Shukla offers.
Broadly speaking, it’s fair to say that the Indian American community should be more politically active, especially given its outsized success. Cocooned in a bubble of privilege, many among us have grown complacent—lulled into a false sense of security that breeds passivity, even as threats to the American dream continue to mount, particularly for immigrants of color.
Yet if there’s one area of political engagement this community hasn’t shied away from, it’s Indo-U.S. relations. PACs such as the U.S.-India Political Action Committee (USINPAC) have a long legacy of advocacy, with notable achievements like the historic U.S.-India Civil Nuclear Agreement in 2008 and the establishment of the U.S. Senate India Caucus in 2004. Several chambers of commerce and similar organizations run by Indian Americans across the country work diligently with Indian consulates, academic institutions, and trade bodies to promote bilateral commerce. They frequently engage mayors, governors, and legislators in this cause.
None of the reasons Tharoor speculates—dual loyalties, assimilation pressures—appear to have held Indian Americans back from championing India or Indo-U.S. relations. A more plausible explanation for the diaspora’s recent passivity in pushing back against Trump’s anti-India agenda may lie in the grim new normal: an environment where dissent and mechanisms of resistance have been rendered powerless by an authoritarian president, enabled by a feckless Congress and a partisan Supreme Court.
Like many other demographic groups, Indian Americans have come to realize that the traditional tools of civic engagement Tharoor alludes to—campaign donations, petitions, public discourse—feel futile against a brazen, ruthlessly transactional, power-obsessed president. Does Tharoor truly believe that, at a time when the systematic dismantling of American democracy goes largely unchallenged, the mainstream political establishment would prioritize bilateral relations with India?
The Kind of Political Engagement India and Indian Americans Don’t Need
While Tharoor’s critique may stem from a failure to grasp the transformed political landscape in America, Shukla’s response comes across as defensive, deflective, and clouded by ideological blind spots.
Her article is laced with pedantic banalities such as: “Just as India and Indian citizens have a duty to pursue their national interest, the United States and its citizens, including Indian Americans, have a duty to pursue ours,” along with the gratuitous reminder that whatever Indian Americans do must be “always within the strictures of U.S. law. It is disingenuous, even dangerous, to suggest we do otherwise.”
These are red herrings. Nowhere in Tharoor’s piece does he suggest that Indian Americans should act against U.S. interests or violate American law.
The most hypocritical part of Shukla’s rebuttal is her claim that Indian Americans are not proxies for India. She conveniently overlooks the fact that rightwing Indian Americans—the very demographic HAF quietly champions—were more than willing to play that role when they supported Trump in the last election. Seduced by his feigned chumminess with Modi, groups like Hindus for America First PAC, Republican Hindu Coalition, and others had no qualms about their craven support of the most blatantly anti-immigrant presidential candidate in modern history—one who openly promised to slash H-1B visas and raise tariffs on India. With friends like these in the diaspora, India and Hinduism hardly need enemies.
For all its lofty claims of championing Hindu American voices, HAF has been deafeningly silent in the public arena when it comes to confronting the real, overarching threats facing Hindu Americans. I haven’t seen a single article, statement, or advocacy effort from HAF addressing Project 2025—arguably the most ominous threat to minority religions in the U.S.
Toward Meaningful Engagement
To overcome passivity and poor representation, Indian Americans must chart a path toward meaningful political engagement—one that serves the best interests of our adopted homeland while fostering a strong, mutually beneficial relationship between India and the United States.
Parthiv N. Parekh is the editor-in-chief of Khabar. We welcome your comments at editor@khabar.com.
Enjoyed reading Khabar magazine? Subscribe to Khabar and get a full digital copy of this Indian-American community magazine.
