Editorial

The results of the Jawaharlal Nehru University Students’ Union (JNUSU) elections 2025 have reaffirmed JNU’s legacy as a bastion of progressive thought. The Left United swept all four central posts — Aditi Mishra as President, K. Gopika as Vice-President, Sunil Yadav as General Secretary, and Danish as Joint Secretary — defeating the ABVP’s challenge with clarity and conviction.

This victory is not merely a campus event; it is an ideological statement. At a time when right-wing narratives dominate national discourse, the JNU electorate has chosen dialogue over dogma, inclusivity over intimidation, and ideas over identity politics. The result is a reminder that India’s youth still value critical thought, dissent, and democratic engagement.

The Left’s success also reflects its ability to evolve. The new leadership blends activism with awareness — addressing contemporary student concerns like mental health, gender equality, and affordable education. Their campaign resonated with those seeking a more humane and participatory vision of student politics.

For the ABVP, the outcome should prompt introspection. While it retained some councilor posts, its broader message failed to strike a chord. Slogans of nationalism alone could not overshadow issues rooted in students’ everyday realities.

Beyond JNU’s walls, these elections echo a subtle national shift. They show that young India is ready to question authority, to demand freedom within institutions, and to redefine patriotism through pluralism and reason. The fluttering red flag atop JNU today is more than symbolic—it is a quiet but firm assertion that democracy lives wherever ideas are allowed to breathe.

The United States has chosen the path of tariff escalation once more, unveiling duties up to 60% on Chinese semiconductors, EV batteries, and European automobiles. Framed as defense of national security and fair trade, the “America First Trade Shield Act” is less shield than sledgehammer—blunt, costly, and likely to shatter more than it protects.

History is unequivocal: tariffs do not correct imbalances; they distort them. The 2018 trade war trimmed the U.S.-China deficit only to swell deficits elsewhere. Jobs promised in steel towns never materialized in net gain. Consumers paid the price—$1,200 per household annually, per recent estimates. Today, with inflation still sticky and supply chains fragile, the damage will be swifter and deeper.

Retaliation is certain. China will choke rare earth flows; Europe will target U.S. LNG and digital services. The casualties? Emerging markets like India, whose factories rely on tariff-hit inputs and whose export strategies hinge on open global lanes. The rupee weakens, costs rise, growth falters. The “China Plus One” dream risks becoming a footnote in a fragmented world.

This is not strategy—it is political theater. Tariffs are easy to announce, hard to unwind, and impossible to contain. They invite retaliation, erode trust, and punish the very workers they claim to save.

The alternative is not surrender but smarter engagement: multilateral subsidy rules, bilateral tech pacts, and investment in domestic capacity without taxing the world. India must respond not with panic but precision—deepening ASEAN ties, expanding PLI schemes, and pressing for WTO reform. Protectionism is a temptation, not a solution. In a connected age, no nation wins a trade war. The U.S. fires the first shot; the rest of us pay the bill.

• SAS Kirmani