Editorial With Sujit Nair | “Trying To Get Somebody Else Elected”: Trump On India's $21 MN USAID

[00:00:00] Namaskar, welcome to another episode of editorial. I have got a very important and interesting editorial for you. Is the United States trying to interfere in Indian politics? Has the United States funded a particular politician to ensure he or she becomes the leader of India?

[00:00:28] Is the United States funding Indian politicians? This is the question we asked tonight. Let's get right to the show. Now, Trump had made this statement on the 20th of February 2025. Just hear it.

[00:00:50] $186 million to the consortium for elections and political process strengthening, including $22 million for inclusion, inclusive, participatory political process in Moldova, and $21 million for voter turnout in India. What do we need to spend $21 million for voter turnout in India?

[00:01:15] Well, $21 million. I guess they were trying to get somebody else elected. Well, we ought to tell the Indian government. What is most important about this statement is that he says, I guess they were trying to get somebody else elected.

[00:01:42] Let's understand the statement very clearly. What he was talking about is that the USAID spent $21 million to promote voter turnout in India. And Trump says this possibly could be to promote another leader. Someone else means the person who is not there currently, which is a new leader.

[00:02:08] So then the serious question is, is United States actually interfering in Indian politics? Is United States actually funding Indian politicians stroke political parties? Is that factually correct?

[00:02:26] Okay. Let us, before we get into all this, let us understand as to what is USAID and what do they stand for? USAID is a, is a program, is an organization that works for humanitarian development across the globe. And they work on behalf of the government of United States.

[00:02:57] Now there are close to 10,000 employees that USAID has and close to two third out of the 10,000 employees work outside of United States. That being said, United USAID doesn't work directly. What they do is they contract people to do work.

[00:03:18] So the, the, the organizations, the NGOs that work in a particular country, USAID funds those particular organizations and work through them for humanitarian and social development of the world. Now, why did USAID give 21 million to India? Why fund Indian elections?

[00:03:48] As part of the humanitarian service, USAID, therefore USAID wants to also promote democracy, wants to also promote the concept of voting, wants to also promote the will of the people as far as formation of governments are concerned.

[00:04:13] So on the fundamental fact that they promote democracy, they fund the consortium for election and political process strengthening, an organization founded in 1995 and funded, like I told you, it is funded by USAID. What? The consortium for election and political processes strengthening.

[00:04:39] Now, if you remember, I told you, they've got 10,000 employees in United, in USAID, but most of them, most of the projects that they undertake, they undertake through other organization. And as far as strengthening of democracy is strengthening of political processes, concern, they do this through this consortium, which was, which was founded in 1995.

[00:05:01] Now, CEPPPS, which is consortium for election and political process strengthening, is a not-for-profit organization that pools the expertise of three different international organizations, the National Democratic Institute, the International Republican Institute, and the International Foundation for Electoral System.

[00:05:26] Like I told you, it aims to support election and political transition globally. They promote elections so that if there is election, there is democracy. So, roughly, you got the whole system. USAID, USAID funded this consortium for election and political process strengthening organization and they have three different organizations under them.

[00:05:53] And that is the organization that claims to have funded 21 million US dollars to India for voter turnout. Now, according to a lot of reports, an MOU with election commission of India was signed with the United States for the money. Now, this was signed in 2012.

[00:06:18] Now, the election commissioner, chief election commissioner of CEC was Mr. S.Y. Qureshi in 2012. And S.Y. Qureshi immediately, that is on the 16th of February itself, Mr. S.Y. Qureshi slammed, completely rejected this concept of taking any money from US. Let me take you through the tweets of Mr. S.Y. Qureshi, Dr. S.Y. Qureshi. My apologies.

[00:06:46] The report in a section of media about MOU by ECI in 2012 when I, that is Mr. S.Y. Qureshi, was the chief election commissioner for funding of certain million dollars by a US agency for raising voter turnout in India does not have an iota of fact. So, S.Y. Qureshi is absolutely rejecting what DOJ said and what the president of United States says.

[00:07:15] He is absolutely denying that. He says, yes, there was a MOU with IFES. IFES. Now, IFES stands for the International Foundation of Electoral Systems. IFES in 2012 when I was the chief election commissioner.

[00:07:32] Ifes said, yes, we had signed with many other agencies and election management bodies to facilitate training of desirous countries at ECI's Training and Resource Center, IIDEM, which was very new at that stage. Ifes said, yes, we had signed with many bodies, including IFES. We didn't sign with USAID. We signed with IFES.

[00:08:00] He went on to say that there is no financing or even promise of finance involved in MOU. Forget X, Y amount. The MOU in fact made it clear in black and white that there would be no financial and legal obligation of any kind from any side. Very clear, he said. He signed with all of these things. But there was not a rupee of money exchange.

[00:08:30] There is no money exchange. He went on to say that the stipulation was made at two different places to leave no scope for any ambiguity. Any mention of any funds in connection with this MOU is completely false and malicious. He said, one place, two places we made it very clear that there is no money. There is no money involved.

[00:09:01] Now, S.Y. Khureshi says nothing to do with US. Nothing to do with USAID. How is this money? Now, another thing is this IFES that Mr. F.Y. Khureshi mentions. If you go to IFES website now, you will find that IFES website states that our public bilateral funders are USAID and United States and Australia aid. You will find these logos that you are seeing on the screen.

[00:09:31] Currently, if you go, you will find these people as their funders. But then it doesn't matter because what Mr. Khureshi says that the election commission of India, when he was the election chief election commissioner, had signed an MOU note out. But the MOU had no mention or no scope of taking or giving money. So, the question of somebody funding the election just doesn't arise.

[00:09:59] Now, this is where Mr. Khureshi's statement stands. Now, let us go to the Prime Minister's statement. The Prime Minister, as early as May 2024, had made a very important statement. The Prime Minister said that foreign powers are making an attempt to influence India's election, but are doomed to fail.

[00:10:27] I can see that there is an attempt by some in the world to influence our elections. They are not giving their opinion, but they are trying to influence our polls. But they will not be successful. People of India will not get influenced. The Prime Minister has spoken about foreign hand, foreign influencer in May of 2024.

[00:10:56] Now the story gets more interesting. The Congress, on the other hand, says that, listen, USAID is very much in the news these days. This is what Jairam Ramesh tweeted. He says, it was set up in November 3, 1961. Claims being made by the US President are typical nonsensical to say the least.

[00:11:21] Even so, the Government of India should bring out a white paper at the earliest detailing the USAID's support to both governmental and non-governmental institutions in India over the decades. He says, it's all nonsensical. There has been no money exchange and all that. What the US President is saying is absolutely nonsensical. And if it is true, if there is some sense to it, please bring a white paper. Let's bring it in front of people.

[00:11:45] Let's see non-governmental organization, which has where they have funded governmental and non-governmental organization. Bring a white paper in the front of the people. Now, this is what the Congress says. So, to conclude, let us understand the chronology of events. Our Prime Minister visits United States 12th, 13th.

[00:12:15] On the 16th, DOGE brings out a statement where they say that we have invested 21 million in voter turnout in India. February 19th, February 20th, the President says, why are we, that is Trump, the United States President, says that why are we paying 21 million to India? They are taxing their people so much. Their tariffs are so high. Why are we paying them?

[00:12:39] And he makes a very, very important statement where he says that, I guess, they were trying to get someone else elected. We have got to tell the Indian government. This could mean that government was getting, trying to get someone else elected. That someone else, Mene, the person who is not currently the Prime Minister, but someone else, some other leader elected. Therefore, they must have spent the money. This was the allegation that the President made.

[00:13:09] This was made after Mr. Modi was back. Now, one wonders whether, was there a discussion with Mr. Modi about this? Such an important issue. Was there a discussion? Did Mr. Modi and Mr. Trump have a discussion on this 21 million dollars that was, that was exchanged, that exchanged hands? And that was used as an influencer to our election. Was there a discussion? And surprisingly, this statement was made after Mr. Modi visited and he came back to India.

[00:13:38] So the timing is very, very important and very crucial. Finally, if we are talking about an MOU signed in 2012 and if the intention of the government of United States was to influence the election, like what Mr. Trump said, and to get someone else elected, then at that point in time, the Prime Minister of India was Manmohan Singh.

[00:14:08] So, who exactly was that someone else that the government of America was trying to get elected? Was it in 2012, the UPA government or was it in 2024, the NDA government, the current Prime Minister, the Prime Minister of India, then Mr. Narendra Modi, who is still the Prime Minister of India? Who are they trying to kind of replace? Who are they trying to get elected? This question is a very interesting one.

[00:14:38] Now, we are going to get into the depth of this. We will keep you informed about what is happening on this one. And I am sure a lot of reports are going to come out on this one. So, we will keep you informed. In the meantime, you think too. Give me your comments. Write your comments down below. And till I see you next time. That's tomorrow at 10. Namaskar. Stay ahead with our cutting-edge news app.

[00:15:08] Instantly access the latest shots in just one minute and breaking news in just 50 words. Download now for a smarter, faster news experience.