'Disinformation' Bogie: Why US Wants 'Regime Degradation', Not Change, In India

A little before the 2019 election, as the Trump administration was starting to disintegrate, parts of the US government and associated non-government entities, stepped up their interference in the Indian democratic process. 

Although this was fairly obvious to close observers of the relationship, the actual mechanics of it was first disclosed in an interview given to The Sunday Guardian by Mike Benz, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Communications and Information Technology at the US State Department for a very short period from autumn 2020 through January 2021.

Benz, now the Executive Director of the non-profit Foundation for Freedom Online, said in the interview earlier this year: “When I was at the State Department, I saw all these same think tanks like the ‘Atlantic Council’ were inundating me and my policy peers with recommendations to promote censoring ‘misinformation’ abroad in so-called ‘nationalist’ or ‘authoritarian’ governments. 

"Modi’s name was always circulated in lists that hit my inbox of places where US tech companies should be more aggressively engaged in ‘content moderation’ (meaning censorship)”.

Subsequently, in a 'Twitter Spaces' event which was mainly about Democratic Party control of social media in the US, Benz made additional references to the “dirty tricks” campaign against Modi and the BJP. He laid out the modus operandi for the social media operation in greater detail. He also referred to State Department funding of $30 million towards the effort. 

The key objective has been to reduce the popularity of Prime Minister Modi and the BJP. This was to make the government of India more pliable and easier to fit into the broader “Western” geo-strategic orientation. There has been no let-up in this campaign. 

One can even observe an intensification every year in Modi’s second term. This campaign of image degradation has been carefully calibrated and the key themes have been “democratic backsliding”, “electoral autocracy”, the old but useful tropes “fascism”, “Hindu nationalism”, etc. 

These themes are visible across the US and British mainstream media, in particular, but increasingly also among other European publications. It is also now widely seen among Western influencers in social media.

Many of these influencers are of Indian origin. Their counterparts in India are also active in the effort — mostly with funding from entities like the Global Engagement Centre of the US State Department and the National Endowment for Democracy supported both by the US government and the megalomaniac billionaire George Soros. 

There are many other subsidiary organizations, several of them set up as support systems within the countries where such campaigns occur. India is no exception.

When you read up on the various colour revolutions in Ukraine and the seasonal one (Spring Revolution) in West Asian countries, the pattern and the organizations become obvious. 

A recent series of tweets by the US Embassy in India speaks to the nature of the process outlined by Mike Benz. After the absence of an ambassador for over two years finally, Eric Garcetti took residence in New Delhi. 

Shortly after that tweets began to emerge about “Disinformation” in the Indian media. Yet another one on “information manipulation” involving the International Research & Exchanges Board (IREX – founded by the Ford Foundation). 

The underlying theme is that the Indian public is being fooled, in a way that requires education on the matter by American information specialists. 

Why is this happening? One can only speculate, but indications are that they want “regime degradation”, not regime change. 

What are the observable realities? The US has been very keen to engage with India in trade and defence co-operation. Both countries are quite eager to list the enormous changes and future plans on those fronts. 

It is equally clear that the Biden administration, at the leadership level, is not quite as enthusiastic in its engagement with India as previous administrations were. At any rate, certainly less than the Trump administration. 

This may be due partly to the fact that Biden, a geriatric, pays little personal attention to almost anything. (YouTube is good visual source on this particular subject. Readers are free to investigate with a sense of discernment about the potential for mis- and disinformation).

A deeper view makes evident, though, that the Department of Commerce and the Department of Defence, that is to say their respective bureaucracies, have continued from previous administrations with a business as usual approach. 

The real point of abrasion seems to be the Department of State. To understand why, we must take a more granular view of the situation in the US itself. 

America is in a state of churn. Politics there is polarised to a level likely never seen since the Civil War.

Everything is being contested, increasingly violently, from gender to the viability of their democratic system. At the socio-economic level, a sense of anarchy is simmering to uneasy levels.

Still, why does the administration not want regime change, why only degradation?

Perhaps because the neo-conservative (neocon) worldview that seems to be driving the Biden administration’s actions is a trans-party and trans-bureaucracy phenomenon. There are push and pull effects.

Seemingly, the right hand of government does not know what the left is doing.

Modi can be the subject of effusive praise by Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo in the same week that the New York Times writes a scathing piece about his democratic failings.

The Commander of the Indo-Pacific Command is a very powerful figure, considering that the US Defence Department has a budget ten times larger than the State Department. Defence Department views have a significant, if not decisive, impact on policy.

Defence co-operation between the US and India is at unprecedented levels, and looks certain to grow. Modi gets a lot of bad press and media attention, but he also has a decade long record of solid and stable ties with the US across the spectrum of co-operation. 

So while active programmes to influence the Indian democratic process are underway with State Department funding, Washington would likely rather deal with the devil they know than the one they do not. 

The one which they do not, has signed an undisclosed Memorandum of Understanding with China, and has shown a public fluency in praising Beijing that is not immediately evident elsewhere.