10/09/2025
‘Ill-Informed and Shallow’: India Rebukes Swiss Remarks on Minority Rights at UNHRC
Offers Help on Racism Challenges; Urges Switzerland to Fix Racism at Home Before Lecturing Others
Srinagar, Sept 10: India mounted a forceful defense of its democratic record at the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) on Tuesday, sharply criticizing Switzerland for what it called “ill-informed,” “shallow,” and “blatantly false” remarks on minority rights and freedom of expression.
The exchange took place during the 60th session of the UNHRC in Geneva, where Indian diplomat Ksh*tij Tyagi spoke at the fifth meeting of the session, taking direct aim at both Switzerland and Pakistan in a strongly worded intervention.
Switzerland, holding the rotating presidency of the UNHRC, had urged India to take more effective measures to safeguard minorities and guarantee media freedom. The Swiss statement, delivered as part of the session’s proceedings, framed India as facing “serious challenges” in upholding basic freedoms.
Tyagi, representing India, dismissed these remarks as not only inaccurate but also a misuse of the Council’s time. He underscored that Switzerland, despite its prominent position, had failed to ground its assessment in facts, and instead relied on distorted narratives.
“India is the world’s largest and most diverse democracy,” Tyagi stressed, pointing to its civilizational ethos of pluralism and inclusion. He argued that India’s democratic institutions, constitutional protections, and robust public discourse serve as enduring evidence of its commitment to human rights.
To have Switzerland, a country that itself struggles with systemic issues of racism and xenophobia, lecture India on rights and freedoms was, he said, both hypocritical and misplaced.
In a striking turn of phrase, Tyagi offered India’s assistance to Switzerland in confronting its own domestic challenges of racism and discrimination.
This rhetorical gesture was widely noted by observers as a bold inversion of the usual dynamic at the UNHRC, where Western democracies often position themselves as monitors of rights conditions in developing nations.
India’s message was clear: criticism must be rooted in credibility, and those who fail to acknowledge their own shortcomings have little standing to judge others.
India also underscored that discussions at the UNHRC must remain fact-based and constructive, rather than veering into politically motivated or selective commentary.
The rebuke to Switzerland carried particular weight because of the country’s role in steering the Council’s agenda, making New Delhi’s pushback both unusual and pointed. Analysts suggested that India’s stance reflected a growing assertiveness in its diplomacy, especially when confronted with narratives it sees as externally imposed or disconnected from realities on the ground.
The exchange with Switzerland was not the only sharp intervention made by India during the session. Tyagi also delivered a blistering critique of Pakistan, describing it as a “failed state” sustained by instability and external handouts.
He argued that Pakistan’s credibility on human rights was non-existent, given its own record of persecution, state-sponsored extremism, and authoritarian practices. India reiterated its determination to protect its sovereignty and its citizens from what it called malicious propaganda emanating from across the border.
Taken together, India’s dual interventions revealed both a defensive and offensive strategy. On the one hand, New Delhi rejected what it saw as inaccurate portrayals of its internal situation. On the other, it sought to turn the spotlight back on its critics, exposing their vulnerabilities and undermining their authority to pass judgment.
This approach mirrors a broader trend in India’s foreign policy posture in recent years, where New Delhi has increasingly emphasized reciprocity in global discourse and refused to allow what it views as double standards to go unchallenged.
The confrontation with Switzerland, in particular, highlighted how contested narratives over democracy and human rights have become in multilateral fora. India framed itself not as a country in need of external scrutiny, but as a confident democracy with lessons to offer others.
The invocation of racism and xenophobia in Switzerland was not incidental but deliberate, reflecting India’s intent to draw attention to issues that Western states themselves often struggle to acknowledge.
For Switzerland, the remarks marked an uncomfortable moment. As a country that prides itself on neutrality and international stewardship, being publicly called out for domestic shortcomings by one of the world’s largest democracies presented a challenge to its moral authority within the Council.
Diplomats noted that while Geneva has long been a hub of rights advocacy, Switzerland’s own record on issues such as racial discrimination and migrant integration has faced criticism from rights groups in recent years.
The broader implications of this exchange at the UNHRC may resonate beyond the chamber. By directly confronting Switzerland and simultaneously lambasting Pakistan, India sent a signal that it will no longer quietly absorb external critique without reply. Instead, it is willing to counter with its own assessments, reframing the debate and asserting its position as an equal rather than a subject of review.
As the session concluded, it was evident that India’s intervention had disrupted the usual rhythm of UNHRC proceedings.
