Connect with us

World

‘My vote snatched’: India election clouded by mysterious candidate pullouts

Published

on

‘My vote snatched’: India election clouded by mysterious candidate pullouts

New Delhi, India – Prince Patel cancelled his vacation plans after the dates were announced for India’s ongoing weeks-long elections. The 61-year-old retired engineer said he had waited patiently for five years to cast his vote in Surat, India’s diamond hub in the western Indian state of Gujarat, “to give my referendum against the policy failures of [Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s] government”.

But when the May 7 date arrived for the city to vote along with 92 other constituencies in the third phase of India’s election, there were no polling booths set up in Surat.

Two weeks earlier, the Election Commission of India (ECI) had already called the seat in favour of Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) after cancelling the nominations of the opposition Congress party’s candidate and five others. The eight remaining candidates all withdrew.

Patel said he was devastated. He had voted for the BJP in 2014, lifted by Modi’s promises of “acche din” (good days). But by 2019, disenchantment had set in. Unemployment and price rise are some of his biggest worries, he said – sentiments that mirror recent opinion polls.

“I would rather vote for a pigeon than choose the BJP,” he said. “My children have graduated but there are no jobs.”

Advertisement

Yet, Surat is only the most extreme example of a peculiar phenomenon that is playing out in multiple constituencies across India: opposition candidates dropping out, joining the ruling BJP or alleging threats to their lives. Even as the BJP has denied any foul play, opposition candidates claim these instances are evidence of an uneven political playing field.

“The government is their [BJP’s] own, and the election commission cancelled several nominations on one point or another,” said Vijay Lohar, who was the candidate of a regional party, the Bahujan Republican Socialist Party, before his nomination was rejected by election authorities. “The BJP is the referee of this game. Where should I complain?”

‘Show of dominance’

More than 400km (250 miles) miles away from Surat, the city of Indore in the central state of Madhya Pradesh is also preparing for what is shaping up, effectively, as a non-contest.

The city’s vote is scheduled for May 13. But Akshay Kanti Bam, the candidate for the Congress, withdrew his nomination on April 29, the last date for withdrawal of candidatures – after the deadline for filing nominations had passed. In essence, that has meant that the Congress cannot contest against sitting BJP member of parliament Shankar Lalwani, who is also the party’s nominee this time around. Bam, meanwhile, has also quit the Congress and joined the BJP on election eve, claiming that the party that nominated him for the constituency did not support his campaign on the ground.

The Congress party has called on voters in Indore to pick the ‘None of the Above’, or NOTA, option on electoral voting machines – which allows them to show displeasure with all candidates who are contesting – even as it accuses the BJP of pressuring Bam to switch sides on election eve. Bam did not respond to repeated requests from Al Jazeera for an interview.

Advertisement

The BJP insists it has had no role in the decisions of opposition candidates who have withdrawn their nominations.

“People have withdrawn as per their discretion and these are absolutely baseless allegations,” said Zafar Islam, a national spokesperson for the BJP. “Thousands of candidates are fighting in this election across hundreds of seats peacefully – these allegations are only aimed at maligning the BJP’s image.”

But some analysts see a pattern in the constituencies affected by candidate withdrawals. Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh are both bastions of the BJP: The party won all 26 of Gujarat’s seats in the Lok Sabha – the lower house of India’s parliament – in 2014 and 2019. It won 27 out of Madhya Pradesh’s 29 seats in 2014 and improved that to 28 wins in 2019.

In the public eye, the pull-out of opposition candidates from key contests in these states is akin to “booth capturing”, said Neelanjan Sircar, a senior fellow at the New Delhi-based Centre for Policy Research (CPR), referring to the illegal practice of seizing control of a polling station during elections, which used to be common in parts of India until a few decades ago.

“At a level of the booth, you capture the booth you are strongest at, and that is done to demonstrate dominance,” said Sircar. The idea, he said, is to “signal to the opposition that we can win elections whenever we want”.

Advertisement

And however the ruling party wants, if Jitendra Chauhan, a candidate who withdrew his nomination from the Gandhinagar seat in Gujarat, is to be believed.

‘Threat to our lives’

Chauhan’s name was supposed to be among the options on the voting machine on May 7, when Gandhinagar voted.

But the 39-year-old painter, who was contesting as an independent candidate, pulled out of the election against India’s powerful Home Minister Amit Shah, who is widely seen as Modi’s deputy.

“There has been extreme pressure upon me, and I have been mentally tortured to the point where I gave up,” Chauhan told Al Jazeera. He claimed that “BJP people” approached his extended family to pressure him to quit. If they could reach his family, they could hurt them too, he feared.

“So I backed off and withdrew my nomination,” he said.

Advertisement

Father to three daughters, Chauhan released a video on April 21, sobbing and alluding to a threat that he received of consequences – including for his very life – if he did not back down. Many other candidates also pulled out from the contest against Shah.

“I have a responsibility to raise my daughters,” he said, adding that he moved his children to safety outside Gujarat, which is ruled by the BJP, before coming back to vote on May 7. “I’m not financially well-off and I cannot afford to resist the BJP because anything can happen to our lives.”

The BJP has not lost the Gandhinagar seat since 1984. In the 2019 elections, Shah won the seat by a margin of 550,000 votes, and there is little evidence that he would have faced any risk of a loss even if all candidates had contested as they had planned to. But his campaign has set its eyes on doubling Shah’s 2019 victory margin, and fewer contestants could help.

In the 2014 and 2019 elections, “there was a booming turnout for anticorruption promises and nationalism”, but the BJP has lost that wave, said Sircar of the CPR. “The BJP is certainly the most popular party in India, but you have to manufacture some ways of keeping these markers of dominance,” he said.

A Gujarat-based political analyst, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of fears over their safety, said these incidents pointed to holes in India’s claims to be the world’s largest democracy simply because of the scale of the election it holds. “The worst of democracies also have elections – you cannot do away with elections,” they said. “But the question is about the fairness of the electoral process, and that seems compromised in India.”

Advertisement

It is a sentiment that Chauhan echoed. He said he had thought of contesting because, as a common man who had grown up in poverty, he felt politics was the only vehicle for change.

“But it will always be like a hole in my heart that I was forced into withdrawing,” said Chauhan, his voice cracking, as he spoke on May 7 after voting. “When I voted today, I did not feel like an independent citizen. I felt like a subject of King Modi.”

‘Future in darkness’

In India, a walkover is rare for candidates. An uncontested win has only been recorded 23 times since the country gained independence in 1947.

But for a little more than a decade, Indian elections have also offered the NOTA option. That’s what the Congress is pushing voters in Indore to pick on May 13.

Anuj, a 60-year-old from Indore, who wished to be identified by his first name, was first drawn to the Congress when he drove the campaign jeep of the late Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi as a young man more than three decades ago. Since then, he has been loyal to the party, he said, and has campaigned for the Congress this time too.

Advertisement

“We all will vote NOTA. My party candidate is not there, and the other option is the BJP,” he said. “It may not change anything, but it will give comfort to my heart that I resisted.”

Meanwhile, a group of lawyers working with civil society activists are also planning to take India’s election commission to court for calling the result of the Surat election without allowing people to vote on NOTA.

“Is NOTA not seen as an independent candidate on the machine?” one of the lawyers said in a conversation with Al Jazeera, requesting anonymity, citing fears of pressure aimed at pre-empting the petition.

Back in Surat, Patel, the retired engineer, was more blunt about his frustration.

“My right to vote has been snatched,” he said.

Advertisement

World

Video: Pakistan Launches Airstrikes on Afghanistan

Published

on

Video: Pakistan Launches Airstrikes on Afghanistan

new video loaded: Pakistan Launches Airstrikes on Afghanistan

Tensions between Afghanistan and Pakistan escalated on Friday as the two countries clashed.
Advertisement

By Monika Cvorak

February 27, 2026

    Denmark’s Prime Minister Calls For a Snap Parliamentary Election

    1:36

    Marco Rubio Says U.S. Is Probing Deadly Cuban Shooting

    0:45

    Amid Chaos in Mexico, False Images Stoked Fears

    2:45

    Advertisement
    Violence in Mexico After Cartel Boss Is Killed

    1:40

    Violence Erupts Across Mexico After Cartel Boss Killed

    0:58

    The Japanese Airport That Doesn’t Lose Bags

    2:59

Video ›

Today’s Videos

Advertisement

U.S.

Politics

Immigration

NY Region

Science

Advertisement

Business

Culture

Books

Wellness

World

Advertisement

Africa

Americas

Asia

South Asia

Donald Trump

Advertisement

Middle East Crisis

Russia-Ukraine Crisis

Visual Investigations

Opinion Video

Advertisement

Advertisement

SKIP ADVERTISEMENT

Continue Reading

World

State Dept authorizes non-essential US Embassy personnel in Jerusalem to depart ahead of possible Iran strikes

Published

on

State Dept authorizes non-essential US Embassy personnel in Jerusalem to depart ahead of possible Iran strikes

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

The State Department is allowing non-essential personnel working at the U.S. Embassy in Jerusalem to leave Israel ahead of possible strikes on Iran. The embassy announced the decision early Friday morning and said that “in response to security incidents and without advance notice” it could place further restrictions on where U.S. government employees can travel within Israel.

Advertisement

The decision came after meetings and phone calls through the night Thursday into Friday, according to The New York Times, which reviewed a copy of an email that U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee sent to embassy workers.

The Times reported that the ambassador said in his email that the move was a result of “an abundance of caution” and that those wishing to leave “should do so TODAY.” He reportedly urged them to look for flights out of Ben Gurion Airport to any destination, cautioning that the embassy’s move “will likely result in high demand for airline seats today.”

The U.S. has authorized non-essential embassy personnel to leave Israel amid escalating tensions with Iran. (Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images; Iranian Leader Press Office/Anadolu via Getty Images)

In the email, Huckabee also said that there was “no need to panic,” but he underscored that those looking to leave should “make plans to depart sooner rather than later,” the Times reported.

“Focus on getting a seat to anyplace from which you can then continue travel to D.C., but the first priority will be getting expeditiously out of country,” Huckabee said in the email, according to the Times.

Advertisement

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, U.S. President Donald Trump’s nominee to be ambassador to Israel, arrives to testify during his Senate Foreign Relations Committee confirmation hearing at the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Mar. 25, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

TRUMP MEETS NETANYAHU, SAYS HE WANTS IRAN DEAL BUT REMINDS TEHRAN OF ‘MIDNIGHT HAMMER’ OPERATION

The embassy reiterated the State Department’s advisory for U.S. citizens to reconsider traveling to Israel and the West Bank “due to terrorism and civil unrest.” Additionally, the department advised that U.S. citizens not travel to Gaza because of terrorism and armed conflict, as well as northern Israel, particularly within 2.5 miles of the Lebanese and Syrian borders because of “continued military presence and activity.” 

It also recommended that U.S. citizens not travel within 1.5 miles of the Egyptian border, with the exception of the Taba crossing, which remains open.

“Terrorist groups, lone-actor terrorists and other violent extremists continue plotting possible attacks in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza. Terrorists and violent extremists may attack with little or no warning, targeting tourist locations, transportation hubs, markets/shopping malls, and local government facilities,” the embassy said in its warning. “The security environment is complex and can change quickly, and violence can occur in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza without warning.”

Advertisement

Israeli and U.S. flags are placed on the road leading to the U.S. consulate in the Jewish neighborhood of Arnona, on the East-West Jerusalem line in Jerusalem, May 9, 2018. (Corinna Kern/picture alliance via Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

While the embassy did not specifically mention Iran in its warning, it referenced “increased regional tensions” that could “cause airlines to cancel and/or curtail flights into and out of Israel.”

Fox News Digital reached out to the State Department and the White House for comment on this matter.

Advertisement

Related Article

Iran’s shadowy chemical weapons program draws scrutiny as reports allege use against protesters
Continue Reading

World

Has India’s influence in Afghanistan grown under the Taliban?

Published

on

Has India’s influence in Afghanistan grown under the Taliban?

Pakistan has accused Afghanistan’s Taliban of serving as a “proxy” for India, amid escalating hostilities between Islamabad and Kabul.

Just hours after Pakistan bombed locations in Kabul early on Friday, Pakistan’s Minister of Defence Khawaja Asif wrote on X that after NATO forces withdrew from Afghanistan in July 2021, “it was expected that peace would prevail in Afghanistan and that the Taliban would focus on the interests of the Afghan people and regional stability”.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

“However, the Taliban turned Afghanistan into a colony of India,” he wrote and accused the Taliban of “exporting terrorism”.

“Pakistan made every effort, both directly and through friendly countries, to keep the situation stable. It carried out extensive diplomacy. However, the Taliban became a proxy of India,” he alleged as he declared an “open war” with Afghanistan.

This is not the first time that Asif has brought India into tensions with Afghanistan.

Advertisement

Last October, he alleged: “India wants to engage in a low-intensity war with Pakistan. To achieve this, they are using Kabul.”

So far, Asif has presented no evidence to back his claims and the Taliban has rejected accusations that it is being influenced by India.

But India has condemned the Pakistani military’s recent actions in Afghanistan, adding to Islamabad’s growing discernment that its nuclear rival and the Taliban are edging closer.

Earlier this week, after the Pakistani military carried out air raids inside Afghanistan on Sunday, India’s Ministry of External Affairs said in a statement that New Delhi “strongly condemns Pakistan’s airstrikes on Afghan territory that have resulted in civilian casualties, including women and children, during the holy month of Ramadan”.

After Friday morning’s flare-up between Pakistan and Afghanistan, India’s foreign ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal again said New Delhi “strongly” condemned Pakistan’s air strikes and also noted that they took place on a Friday during the holy month of Ramadan.

Advertisement

“It is another attempt by Pakistan to externalise its internal failures,” Jaiswal said in a statement on X.

Has India’s influence in Afghanistan grown under the Taliban and what is India’s endgame with Afghanistan?

Here’s what we know:

How have relations between India and the Taliban evolved?

When the Taliban first rose to power in Afghanistan in 1996, India adopted a hostile policy towards the group and did not recognise its assumption of power. India also shunned all diplomatic relations with the Taliban.

At the time, New Delhi viewed the Taliban as a proxy for Pakistan’s intelligence agencies. Pakistan, together with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, were the only three countries to have also recognised the Taliban administration at that point.

Advertisement

Then, in 2001, India supported the US-led invasion of Afghanistan, which toppled the Taliban administration. India then reopened its embassy in Kabul and embraced the new government led by Hamid Karzai. The Taliban, in response, attacked Indian embassies and consulates in Afghanistan. In 2008, at least 58 people were killed when the Taliban bombed India’s embassy in Kabul.

In 2021, after the Taliban returned to power, India closed its embassy in Afghanistan once again and also did not officially recognise the Taliban as the government of the country.

But a year later, as relations between Pakistan and the Taliban deteriorated over armed groups which Pakistan accuses Afghanistan of harbouring, India began engaging with the Taliban.

In 2022, India sent a team of “technical experts” to run its mission in Kabul and officially reopened its embassy in the Afghan capital last October. New Delhi also allowed the Taliban to operate Afghanistan consulates in the Indian cities of Mumbai and Hyderabad.

Over the past two years, officials from New Delhi and Afghanistan have also held meetings abroad, in Kabul and in New Delhi.

Advertisement

In January last year, the Taliban administration’s Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi met India’s Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri in Dubai, the United Arab Emirates.

Then, in October 2025, he visited New Delhi and met Indian foreign minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar.

After this meeting, Muttaqi told journalists that Kabul “has always sought good relations with India” and, in a joint statement, Afghanistan and India pledged to have “close communication and continue regular engagement”.

Taliban Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi arrives at Darul Uloom Deoband, an Islamic seminary, in Deoband in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh, India [File: Anushree Fadnavis/Reuters]

Besides beefing up diplomatic ties, India has also offered humanitarian support to Afghanistan under the Taliban’s rule.

After a magnitude 6.3 earthquake struck northern Afghanistan in November last year, India shipped food, medicine and vaccines, and Jaishankar was also among the first foreign ministers to call Muttaqi and offer his support. Since last December, India has also approved and implemented several healthcare infrastructure projects in Afghanistan, according to a December 2025 report by the country’s press information bureau.

Advertisement

Praveen Donthi, senior analyst at the International Crisis Group, told Al Jazeera that the costs of avoiding engagement with the Taliban in the past have compelled the Indian government to adopt strategic pragmatism towards the Afghan leadership this time.

“New Delhi does not want to disregard this relationship on ideological grounds or create strategic space for India’s main strategic rivals, Pakistan and China, in its neighbourhood,” he said.

Raghav Sharma, professor and director at the Centre for Afghanistan Studies at the OP Jindal Global University in India, added that the current engagement also stems from New Delhi’s pragmatic realisation that the Taliban is now in charge in Afghanistan and that there is no meaningful opposition.

“States engage in order to protect and further their interests. While there is little by way of ideological convergence, there are areas of strategic convergence, which is what has pushed India to engage with the Taliban, some of their unpalatable policies notwithstanding,” he said.

Is this a new stance towards Afghanistan?

No. India’s growing influence and engagement with Afghanistan began well before the Taliban returned to power in August 2021.

Advertisement

Between December 2001 and September 2014, during the US presence in Afghanistan, New Delhi was a strong supporter of the Karzai government, and then of his successor, Ashraf Ghani’s government, which was in power from September 2014 until August 2021, when the US withdrew from the country.

In October 2011, under Karzai, India and Afghanistan renewed ties by signing an agreement to form a strategic partnership. New Delhi also pledged to support Afghanistan in the face of foreign troops in the nation as a part of this agreement.

Under both Karzai and his successor, Ghani, India invested more than $3bn in humanitarian aid and reconstruction work in Afghanistan. This included reconstruction projects like schools and hospitals, and also a new National Assembly building in Kabul, which was inaugurated in December 2015 when Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited Afghanistan for the first time.

India’s Border Road Organisation (BRO) also assisted Afghanistan in the development of infrastructure projects like the 218km Zaranj-Delaram highway in 2009 under Karzai’s government.

Under Ghani, New Delhi undertook building the Salma Dam project to help with irrigating Afghanistan. In June 2016, when Modi visited Afghanistan once again, he inaugurated this $290m dam project. In May 2016, Iran, India and Afghanistan also signed a trilateral trade and transit agreement on the Chabahar port.

Advertisement
Modi and Ghani
India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi (L) and Afghan President Ashraf Ghani hold sweets as they inaugurate Afghanistan’s new parliament building in Kabul, Afghanistan [File: Stringer/Reuters]

During this period – 2001-2021 – Pakistan’s unease with New Delhi and Kabul’s new partnership grew.

In October 2011, after signing a strategic agreement with India, Karzai had assured Islamabad that while “India is a great friend, Pakistan is a twin brother”.

But Karzai was critical of Pakistan’s support for the Taliban. In his last speech as president of Afghanistan in Kabul in September 2014, he stated that he believed most of the Taliban leadership lived in Pakistan.

In a 2011 report by a Washington, DC-based think tank, the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Amer Latif, former director for South Asian affairs in the US Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, noted that Karzai was walking a “fine line between criticising Pakistan’s activities while also referring to Pakistan as Afghanistan’s ‘twin brother’.”

“It is in this context that Karzai appears to be looking to solidify long-term partnerships with countries that will aid his stabilisation efforts,” he said, referring to Karzai’s visit to India and his efforts to improve relations with the subcontinent.

When Ghani rose to power in September 2014, he tried to reset ties with Pakistan and also visited the country in November that year. But his efforts did not result in improved ties due to border disputes with Pakistan continuing until his administration was overthrown by the Taliban in August 2021.

Advertisement

So why has India maintained ties with Afghanistan under the Taliban?

Initially, when the Taliban returned to power in 2021 following the withdrawal of the US, political analysts largely expected Pakistan to lead the way in recognising the Taliban administration as the official government of Afghanistan, improving bilateral relations which had turned icy under Karzai and Ghani.

But relations turned hostile, with Pakistan repeatedly accusing the Taliban of allowing anti-Pakistan armed groups like the Pakistan Taliban (TTP) to operate from Afghan soil. The Taliban denies this.

Then, the deportation of tens of thousands of Afghan refugees by Pakistan in recent years further strained ties between the two neighbours.

India has ultimately taken a pragmatic approach to the Taliban in order to maintain the good relations it built with Afghanistan from 2001 to 2021, and has somewhat leveraged poor relations between Pakistan and Afghanistan to cement these.

“With Pakistan’s increasingly strained relations with Afghanistan, the logic of ‘enemy’s enemy’ is acting as a glue between Kabul and New Delhi,” International Crisis Group’s Donthi said.

Advertisement

He added that despite the fact that India’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government opposes Islamist organisations, “the strategic necessity to counter Pakistan has led it to engage with the Taliban proactively”.

India and Pakistan are nuclear-armed rivals which engaged in a four-day conflict in May 2025 after armed rebels killed Indian tourists in Pahalgam, a popular tourist spot in Indian-administered Kashmir, last April. New Delhi accused Pakistan of supporting rebel fighters, a charge Pakistan strongly denied.

For its part, Afghanistan took the opportunity to strongly condemn the Pahalgam attack and the Indian Ministry of External Affairs expressed “deep appreciation” to the Taliban for its “strong condemnation of the terrorist attack in Pahalgam … as well as for the sincere condolences”.

India has also condemned Pakistani military action in Afghanistan and has provided aid to thousands of Afghan refugees displaced from Pakistan.

So what is India’s endgame in Afghanistan?

Sharma, the OP Jindal Global University professor, said India wants to ensure that Pakistan and China, whose influence has grown in South Asia in recent years, “do not have a free run”, as “there is a divergence of interest on Afghanistan” with both Pakistan and its ally, China.

Advertisement

“There are security interests New Delhi is keen to further and protect for which engagement [with the Taliban] is the only option,” he added.

Anil Trigunayat, a former Indian diplomat, noted that while Afghanistan and Pakistan relations have their own dynamic, currently the Taliban leadership, even if not a monolith, refuses to play to the tunes of the Pakistan military and its intelligence agency.

“Hence they [Pakistan] accuse Indian complicity in Taliban actions in Pakistan,” he said.

But the Taliban, he said, “understands and appreciates India’s intent, policies and [humanitarian] contributions”, making its leaders keen to continue collaboration with New Delhi.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending