The Peril of the Foreign Hand: Time to Move Beyond Rhetoric

Few political phrases in India have enjoyed the longevity and persistence of the term “foreign hand.” Popularised during the Indira Gandhi era, it has resurfaced at every moment of domestic turbulence—communal riots in the 1970s, Punjab militancy in the 1980s, insurgencies in the Northeast, terrorist bombings in the 1990s and 2000s, the farmers’ protests of 2020–21, and more recently, the agitation in Ladakh. The phrase has become a political staple whenever unrest, communal flare-ups, or agitation arise in India.

Security Crises and Insurgencies (1980s–1990s)

During Punjab militancy and separatist movements, successive governments alleged external support—most notably from Pakistan’s agencies—for insurgents.

Post-2000: Terror Attacks and Political Explanation

Major terror incidents and episodes of communal violence often produced immediate public and political claims of external backing. The charge is used both to explain operational complexity and to frame the issue as a national security threat, warranting extraordinary responses.

Farmers’ Protests (2020–2021): A Contemporary Template

During the large-scale farmers’ agitation, the government publicly suggested infiltration by foreign elements and “anti-national” forces. Investigations were launched into alleged foreign funding and influence. The rhetoric framed the protests not merely as domestic policy disagreements but as partially externally inspired mobilisations—an approach that influenced policing, legal probes (FCRA/foreign funding checks), and public perception.

Recent Example: Ladakh Unrest (2025)

During the 2025 Ladakh agitation, official statements at times referenced possible external instigation, while probes (FCRA/Central agencies) examined funding and organisational links. Wangchuk had been active on national and international stages since 2005; however, news of alleged illegal funds, ulterior motives, dubious links, and a pro-anti-India stance surfaced only after four Ladakhis lost their lives, attaining martyr status as a symbol of anti-India sentiment.

Why Governments Use the “Foreign Hand” Narrative

External attribution simplifies political complexity. The “foreign hand” narrative justifies strong counter-insurgency measures and rallies national sentiment around central authority.

It enables deployment of intelligence, policing, and legal tools (e.g., NIA, FCRA checks) framed as anti-terror or anti-foreign interference measures.

Nationalist rhetoric builds popular support and delegitimises opponents.

It shifts blame from administrative lapses—such as poor grievance redress or slow policy response—to malevolent outsiders.

Counterproductive Consequences

Reliance on the “foreign hand” narrative without credible evidence politicises security agencies. Investigative bodies such as the NIA or intelligence agencies risk being seen as political instruments rather than neutral guardians of national security.

The narrative creates a smokescreen, preventing diagnosis and correction of critical, home-grown vulnerabilities.

Lack of seamless data-sharing between central agencies (IB, RAW) and state/local police (LIUs) is a critical failure.

Using intelligence and police for political ends erodes professionalism, morale, and effectiveness; intelligence gathering becomes secondary to political action.

Local Intelligence Units (LIUs), the first line of defence, are often understaffed, underfunded, and technologically outdated. The police beat system, though closest to the ground, is largely ineffective.

A culture of risk-averse "file-pushing" prevails over proactive ground-level intelligence work, with little accountability for failures.

By repeatedly invoking the “foreign hand” without addressing domestic gaps, the state makes it easier for actual foreign agents to exploit governance lapses, communal polarization, and intelligence failures.

The spectre of foreign interference and terrorism is often used to justify stringent laws. The UAPA and FCRA, while framed as security measures, are sometimes used to target dissent, silence activists, NGOs, and journalists by branding them "anti-national," chilling free speech and civil society.

Towards Proof-Based Security Governance

India needs a disciplined and transparent framework for addressing external interference:

Evidentiary standards: Public attribution of foreign involvement should rely on intelligence that can withstand judicial or parliamentary scrutiny. Even if operational details cannot be disclosed, allegations must be credible.

Oversight mechanisms: A parliamentary committee on national security or an ombudsman could periodically review “foreign hand” claims to ensure they are fact-based rather than politically expedient.

Direct engagement: Even when foreign links exist, governments must engage with domestic stakeholders. For instance, Ladakh’s demand for Sixth Schedule protections requires meaningful constitutional dialogue alongside security vigilance.

Precise investigations: Security agencies should conduct focused, time-bound probes rather than open-ended crackdowns, distinguishing foreign-sponsored extremism from ordinary civic dissent.

Conclusion

The “foreign hand” will remain part of India’s political lexicon for years. But if invoked indiscriminately, it serves neither democracy nor national security. True strength lies not in rhetorical deflection but in confronting domestic failings, addressing administrative weaknesses, and presenting credible evidence when foreign forces intervene.

It is time to move beyond the tired “Theory of Foreign Hand” and focus on the real causes embedded within the internal fabric of national or state administrative mechanisms. This is not to deny that foreign adversaries exist—they will seize every opportunity to harm India. The state must develop the capacity to identify and neutralise such threats before they strike, demonstrating its inner strength and vigilance.

Author: Dr (Lt Col) Atul Tyagi, Lawyer & Educationist & numerous contemporary social, political & legal issues. Contact: 540652090, atultyagi100@gmail.com,