A recent exposé by OpIndia has brought attention to the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS), highlighting its role within a foreign-funded network of NGOs and think tanks allegedly working in opposition to India’s national interests. The report claims that CSDS plays a key part in shaping political narratives that favor external agendas, while presenting itself as an academic and civil society institution but manipulating public discourse and weakening democratic frameworks under the guise of research and activism.
This report thoroughly examines the CSDS’s institutional history, ideological leanings, funding sources, and global partnerships. The central thesis is that CSDS functions as a key node in a transnational ecosystem involving foreign governments, media outfits, and ideological lobbies that often presents a hostile posture towards India’s elected leadership, its cultural fabric, and its majority population. This influence, it argues, serves foreign policy goals of external powers under the guise of academic neutrality and activism.
Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS)
Established in 1963 by Rajni Kothari, CSDS has long operated with a critical stance toward India’s Hindu majority, democratic institutions, and nationalist movements. The founding ties to foreign-backed entities such as the Asia Foundation, allegedly a front for U.S. intelligence activities during the Cold War, cast early doubts on its independence.
CSDS’s research over the decades has consistently focused on accentuating caste divisions, framing Hindus as oppressors, and portraying the Indian state as authoritarian or exclusionary. The institution has been accused of laundering such narratives through academic frameworks to provide ideological ammunition for global lobbies antagonistic to India’s sovereignty.
Foreign Funding and Strategic Partnerships
Though CSDS receives some funding from Indian government bodies such as the Indian Council of Social Science Research (ICSSR), a significant portion of its resources come from foreign institutions raising concerns over external influence in domestic policy debates. Notable funders include:
- Konrad Adenauer Stiftung (Germany): A foundation linked to Germany’s ruling CDU party, which has contributed over ₹2.6 crore. Its mandate to promote Western democratic values has sometimes clashed with Indian sociopolitical realities, particularly under nationalist governments.
- International Development Research Centre (Canada): A government-run entity that funded nearly a third of CSDS’s annual budget for eight years. The center is also known for backing identity politics and minority-centric movements, raising concerns in light of Canada’s open support for Khalistani separatism.
- Siemenpuu Foundation (Finland): Backed by the Finnish Foreign Ministry, it funds CSDS-linked ecological and tribal rights projects. However, critics claim its platforms serve as safe spaces for anti-Hindu and far-left ideologues, some of whom are sympathetic to Naxalite extremism.
- Berggruen Institute (USA): Its publication Noema has frequently published ideologically charged, anti-India content, often authored by individuals connected with Pakistan or Western think tanks critical of Indian policy.
- Ford Foundation, Open Society Foundations (Soros), Omidyar Network: These foundations are globally recognized for supporting regime change, civil unrest, and identity-based activism. Their support to CSDS, especially through collaborative projects like the “Indian Muslims Project,” has amplified narratives around oppression, Islamophobia, and “rising fascism” in India.
- Sciences Po (France): Contributions from its FNSP branch have helped fund CSDS operations. Prominent faculty like Christophe Jaffrelot have regularly produced critiques of Hindu nationalism and India’s democratic trajectory.
Links to Foreign Media, Intelligence Fronts, and Investigative Outlets
The report outlines CSDS’s connections with international media networks and organizations that claim to support “media freedom” and “investigative journalism.” These include Bellingcat, OCCRP, RSF, GIJN, and Reporters’ Collective many of which are funded by institutions tied to Western governments and intelligence-linked NGOs like the National Endowment for Democracy (NED).
This network creates a feedback loop, CSDS-affiliated academics produce politically charged research, which is then amplified by global media. These reports subsequently inform international freedom indexes and policy papers that depict India in a negative light justifying more foreign intervention and funding for the same actors.
Strategic Objectives and Narrative Engineering
The report identifies four major thematic areas in CSDS’s work:
- Fragmenting Hindu Society: Research is used to amplify caste divisions, distancing marginalized groups like Dalits, OBCs, and Adivasis from broader Hindu identity thus weakening social cohesion and the nationalist movement.
- Promoting Dalit-Muslim Solidarity: CSDS frequently pushes narratives that tie Dalit and Muslim grievances together, portraying both as oppressed by the Hindu state, an ideological alignment often seen in left-Islamist alliances.
- Portraying Hindus and the State as Oppressors: Key CSDS figures and associated journalists consistently portray Hindus as communal or violent, irrespective of evidence. Events like the 2002 Gujarat riots or the 2020 Delhi violence are used as case studies without acknowledging counter-narratives or legal findings.
- Challenging Indian Sovereignty: CSDS-backed studies and protests often target national integrity, especially concerning issues like Kashmir, the Northeast, and citizenship laws. The research often supports street-level activism that mirrors the objectives of foreign stakeholders.
Links to Hostile Entities and Adversarial Groups
The analysis outlines the alignment of CSDS and its ecosystem with a range of anti-India or radical elements:
- Western regime-change actors: Many CSDS funders like NED, OSF, and Ford Foundation have a track record of engineering political change in various parts of the world.
- Pro-Khalistan and pro-Islamist actors: The involvement of Canadian funding sources, known for supporting Sikh separatists, as well as links to anti-CAA protests, raises red flags.
- China’s indirect influence: Through think tanks like Berggruen Institute, individuals and ideas sympathetic to China or hostile to Indian unity are given platforms within CSDS-linked academic discussions.
Underlying Strategy and Long-Term Agenda
The report highlights a consistent method: foreign actors with specific geopolitical goals collaborate with Indian intellectuals and NGOs to sow distrust, exacerbate identity conflicts, and delegitimize India’s governance model. These efforts are designed not just to criticize policy but to actively influence political outcomes often favoring regimes or ideologies more amenable to Western or Chinese influence.
Their silence on anti-Hindu violence, forced conversions, or terrorist threats while being highly vocal on real or perceived minority grievances suggests an intentional ideological bias, not mere academic neutrality.
The Centre for the Study of Developing Societies, along with its allied NGOs and media partners, represents what the report calls a “narrative warfare complex” where foreign funds, ideological activism, and selective research converge to challenge India’s internal stability and global image.
To safeguard democratic integrity and national sovereignty, the report calls for greater transparency, regulatory oversight, and scrutiny into how such institutions operate, who funds them, and what agendas they push especially when they operate under the guise of research and civil society.
In an era of hybrid warfare and information manipulation, civil society institutions must not become unwitting instruments of foreign interference.
(With inputs from OpIndia)
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
