Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

Coordinated efforts by Indian state-aligned actors to influence political discourse and policy debates in Western countries constitute a form of foreign interference that warrants scrutiny.

Codex_Indîa

12,112 subscribers

129,264 views • 7 months ago •via X (Twitter)

News & Politics

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Over the past 11 years, the Modi government has crippled Chinese-funded platforms like NewsClick and curbed the influence of political dynasties aligned with Beijing. By tightening control on foreign funding, India has significantly reduced Deep State interference in its internal affairs. @Rohityednap #NarendraModi

Over the past 11 years, the Modi government has crippled Chinese-funded platforms like NewsClick and curbed the influence of political dynasties aligned with Beijing. By tightening control on foreign funding, India has significantly reduced Deep State interference in its internal affairs. @Rohityednap #NarendraModi

OpIndia.com

11,758 views • 1 year ago

A Multiple foreign intelligence agencies such as the CIA (United States), MSS (China), MI6 (United Kingdom), Turkey's MIT, and Ukrainian intelligence—are jointly attempting to engineer a coup or coup-like situation in India .These claims are equally strong and backed by verifiable evidence. There are several points in consideration: Foreign influence operations are real. Intelligence agencies around the world conduct espionage, cyber operations, influence campaigns, disinformation, recruitment of sources, and attempts to shape foreign public opinion. This is well documented in many countries, including India. India has identified and responded to foreign interference in the past. Indian authorities have periodically alleged or investigated activities involving espionage, cyberattacks, extremist financing, separatist support, and foreign influence by various state and non-state actors. These activities differ in scope and objectives and do not necessarily amount to an attempt to overthrow the government. A coordinated multinational conspiracy involving all of the agencies you listed has not been established publicly. There is no publicly available evidence demonstrating that the CIA, China's MSS, the UK's MI6, Turkey's MIT, and Ukrainian intelligence are jointly orchestrating a coup-like operation against India. Such an assertion would require corroborated evidence from credible investigations, official findings, or reliable intelligence disclosures. Hybrid warfare is a more commonly discussed framework. Many security analysts describe modern geopolitical competition as involving cyberattacks, information operations, economic pressure, influence campaigns, and proxy actors rather than conventional coups. Democracies, including India, often face attempts by different actors to influence public discourse or exploit existing social and political divisions. That does not mean those efforts are centrally coordinated or aimed at regime change. If you're interested in analyzing whether India is facing hybrid warfare, foreign influence operations, or information warfare, those are well-established subjects with substantial research and publicly available evidence.

A Multiple foreign intelligence agencies such as the CIA (United States), MSS (China), MI6 (United Kingdom), Turkey's MIT, and Ukrainian intelligence—are jointly attempting to engineer a coup or coup-like situation in India .These claims are equally strong and backed by verifiable evidence. There are several points in consideration: Foreign influence operations are real. Intelligence agencies around the world conduct espionage, cyber operations, influence campaigns, disinformation, recruitment of sources, and attempts to shape foreign public opinion. This is well documented in many countries, including India. India has identified and responded to foreign interference in the past. Indian authorities have periodically alleged or investigated activities involving espionage, cyberattacks, extremist financing, separatist support, and foreign influence by various state and non-state actors. These activities differ in scope and objectives and do not necessarily amount to an attempt to overthrow the government. A coordinated multinational conspiracy involving all of the agencies you listed has not been established publicly. There is no publicly available evidence demonstrating that the CIA, China's MSS, the UK's MI6, Turkey's MIT, and Ukrainian intelligence are jointly orchestrating a coup-like operation against India. Such an assertion would require corroborated evidence from credible investigations, official findings, or reliable intelligence disclosures. Hybrid warfare is a more commonly discussed framework. Many security analysts describe modern geopolitical competition as involving cyberattacks, information operations, economic pressure, influence campaigns, and proxy actors rather than conventional coups. Democracies, including India, often face attempts by different actors to influence public discourse or exploit existing social and political divisions. That does not mean those efforts are centrally coordinated or aimed at regime change. If you're interested in analyzing whether India is facing hybrid warfare, foreign influence operations, or information warfare, those are well-established subjects with substantial research and publicly available evidence.

MajorSammerToor

103,476 views • 17 days ago

The United States will provide foreign aid in a way that is strategically aligned with our foreign policy priorities and the priorities of our host countries. — Secretary Marco Rubio

The United States will provide foreign aid in a way that is strategically aligned with our foreign policy priorities and the priorities of our host countries. — Secretary Marco Rubio

Department of State

253,324 views • 1 year ago

Russian state media inject pro-Kremlin propaganda into public discourse to sway opinion and influence foreign policy in Russia's favour. Learn more about Russia’s #disinformation tools & practices:

Russian state media inject pro-Kremlin propaganda into public discourse to sway opinion and influence foreign policy in Russia's favour. Learn more about Russia’s #disinformation tools & practices:

Foreign Policy CAN

65,896 views • 2 years ago

🇭🇺 "Anyone who deals with politics in Hungary cannot accept money from abroad," Orbán Viktor stated, citing new legislation before Parliament. We know how to prevent interference from a foreign state, we know how to detect cooperation between political or public actors in Hungary and a foreign state. We know how to document it, we know how to contain it, we have a knowledge of how to protect a country against such a conspiracy, such a foreign influence.

🇭🇺 "Anyone who deals with politics in Hungary cannot accept money from abroad," Orbán Viktor stated, citing new legislation before Parliament. We know how to prevent interference from a foreign state, we know how to detect cooperation between political or public actors in Hungary and a foreign state. We know how to document it, we know how to contain it, we have a knowledge of how to protect a country against such a conspiracy, such a foreign influence.

Zoltan Kovacs

13,866 views • 1 year ago

Asked again about Indian foreign interference, PM Carney said Canada is actively monitoring and countering foreign interference and transnational repression from "a wide range of countries" while protecting Canadians.

Asked again about Indian foreign interference, PM Carney said Canada is actively monitoring and countering foreign interference and transnational repression from "a wide range of countries" while protecting Canadians.

Juno News

13,227 views • 5 months ago

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has been made acting administrator of USAID. "There are a lot of functions of USAID that are going to continue, that are going to be part of American foreign policy, but it has to be aligned with American foreign policy."

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has been made acting administrator of USAID. "There are a lot of functions of USAID that are going to continue, that are going to be part of American foreign policy, but it has to be aligned with American foreign policy."

Reshad Hudson

13,055 views • 1 year ago

AIPAC and Israeli media outlets are now openly celebrating their efforts to fund opposition against Rep. Thomas Massie. Why is Israeli influence in American elections never treated as a foreign influence operation, with zero scrutiny in DC? How is a foreign government and its affiliated organizations openly participating in American political campaigns and publicly boasting about their involvement? What does the outcome of Massie’s race mean for the future of American politics, foreign influence, and the ability of candidates to challenge the Washington establishment? We discuss this and more with Joe Kent.

AIPAC and Israeli media outlets are now openly celebrating their efforts to fund opposition against Rep. Thomas Massie. Why is Israeli influence in American elections never treated as a foreign influence operation, with zero scrutiny in DC? How is a foreign government and its affiliated organizations openly participating in American political campaigns and publicly boasting about their involvement? What does the outcome of Massie’s race mean for the future of American politics, foreign influence, and the ability of candidates to challenge the Washington establishment? We discuss this and more with Joe Kent.

Redacted

13,011 views • 2 months ago

Democrat Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer gave a $20 million state grant to Global Link International, an NGO run by her political donor Fay Beydoun Michigan Democrats are also funneling money overseas to Africa, “Michigan has a lot of issues, and there is no reason they should be sending money to Africa — The fact that Michigan is sending money overseas to foreign countries for political agendas, to influence those foreign countries is ridiculous” “The governor of Michigan paying one of her biggest political donors through a state Grant, mind you, $20 million. Does that make sense? Like, should this be allowed?”

Democrat Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer gave a $20 million state grant to Global Link International, an NGO run by her political donor Fay Beydoun Michigan Democrats are also funneling money overseas to Africa, “Michigan has a lot of issues, and there is no reason they should be sending money to Africa — The fact that Michigan is sending money overseas to foreign countries for political agendas, to influence those foreign countries is ridiculous” “The governor of Michigan paying one of her biggest political donors through a state Grant, mind you, $20 million. Does that make sense? Like, should this be allowed?”

Wall Street Apes

113,157 views • 11 months ago

Americans are “really concerned” about foreign countries influencing U.S. policy – and Israel in particular. Mark Mitchell, Rasmussen Reports finds that 41% of respondents say Israel has too much influence over U.S. policy… and believes Americans are repulsed by Israel's “leftist tactics” to silence its critics.

Americans are “really concerned” about foreign countries influencing U.S. policy – and Israel in particular. Mark Mitchell, Rasmussen Reports finds that 41% of respondents say Israel has too much influence over U.S. policy… and believes Americans are repulsed by Israel's “leftist tactics” to silence its critics.

One America News

76,056 views • 9 months ago

A parliamentary debate on Israeli-linked lobbying and political influence in the UK has reignited questions about transparency, foreign influence and the role of advocacy groups in shaping government policy. Al Jazeera's Mohammad Saleh explains.

A parliamentary debate on Israeli-linked lobbying and political influence in the UK has reignited questions about transparency, foreign influence and the role of advocacy groups in shaping government policy. Al Jazeera's Mohammad Saleh explains.

Al Jazeera English

61,943 views • 1 month ago

BELLAVANCE: "I think this is the beginning of foreign interference by the United States in Alberta's politics and Canadian politics ... You could see foreign interference grow exponentially because the U.S. is very much in a state of mind of trying to get more territory."

BELLAVANCE: "I think this is the beginning of foreign interference by the United States in Alberta's politics and Canadian politics ... You could see foreign interference grow exponentially because the U.S. is very much in a state of mind of trying to get more territory."

Scott Robertson

34,049 views • 6 months ago

Americans have a right to know when foreign actors are trying to steer our policy debates because the big war with a lot of our adversaries will be an information war.

Americans have a right to know when foreign actors are trying to steer our policy debates because the big war with a lot of our adversaries will be an information war.

Steven Crowder

89,348 views • 8 months ago

🇪🇺 Ursula wants to quickly ensure the EU can wage wars and keep sanctions up now, as Orbán is out. She suggests removing unanimity voting on foreign policy and moving it to “qualified majority voting.” In that case, wars, sanctions, and all kinds of foreign policy questions can be decided by 15 out of 27 countries. A small union of countries can’t block, e.g., wars then.

🇪🇺 Ursula wants to quickly ensure the EU can wage wars and keep sanctions up now, as Orbán is out. She suggests removing unanimity voting on foreign policy and moving it to “qualified majority voting.” In that case, wars, sanctions, and all kinds of foreign policy questions can be decided by 15 out of 27 countries. A small union of countries can’t block, e.g., wars then.

Lord Bebo

66,904 views • 3 months ago

Raila Odinga: In 1982, when some of us wanted to form a political party, the regime then went to Parliament and introduced a law to make the country a single party state by introducing Section 2A that made it illegal to form any other political party #SabaSaba

Raila Odinga: In 1982, when some of us wanted to form a political party, the regime then went to Parliament and introduced a law to make the country a single party state by introducing Section 2A that made it illegal to form any other political party #SabaSaba

Citizen TV Kenya

33,816 views • 1 year ago

NEW: Mike Benz exposes how USAID funds state-sponsored hit pieces to crush political opponents. This is wild. For a mere investment of $20 million, USAID’s state-sponsored hit pieces were able to: • Generate at least $4.5 billion in fines against targets of these hit pieces. • Influence over 548 policy changes across foreign governments and private sectors. “What they are saying… is that they proudly sponsored hit-piece journalism to ruin people’s lives and go after political targets in order to change the policies of foreign governments from the inside,” Mike Benz explained.

NEW: Mike Benz exposes how USAID funds state-sponsored hit pieces to crush political opponents. This is wild. For a mere investment of $20 million, USAID’s state-sponsored hit pieces were able to: • Generate at least $4.5 billion in fines against targets of these hit pieces. • Influence over 548 policy changes across foreign governments and private sectors. “What they are saying… is that they proudly sponsored hit-piece journalism to ruin people’s lives and go after political targets in order to change the policies of foreign governments from the inside,” Mike Benz explained.

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

469,228 views • 1 year ago

Watch closely who is loudly opposing any strike on the Islamic Republic’s military infrastructure. Then look at who endorsed them. A recurring name appears: NIAC Action, the political arm of the National Iranian American Council. NIAC presents itself as a voice for Iranian-Americans. That’s the branding. The controversy begins when you examine its leadership history and political activity. It was founded by Trita Parsi (alongside others, including Siamak Namazi). Over the years, many Iranian dissidents and diaspora activists have accused NIAC of advocating positions that align closely with the Islamic Republic’s foreign policy goals, particularly around sanctions relief and nuclear negotiations. In 2012, Parsi sued an Iranian-American activist for defamation over claims that NIAC functioned as a regime lobby. During court discovery, internal emails became public. Those documents showed that Parsi had extensive communications with Iranian officials, including Javad Zarif. Later, Zarif became foreign minister and a central figure in negotiating the nuclear deal. The released emails revealed coordination of meetings, messaging discussions, and efforts to facilitate access between Iranian officials and U.S. policymakers. Parsi has argued these contacts were normal diplomatic engagement. But the pattern went beyond neutral policy advocacy and into organized influence aligned with Tehran’s strategic interests. That distinction matters. Diplomacy is not the same thing as lobbying on behalf of a foreign regime. But the boundary between them can blur, and that blur is exactly where influence operates. Fast-forward to recent debates. On Iranian state media, analyst Foad Izadi, a frequent voice on Iran’s state broadcaster, openly discussed lobbying networks in the U.S. and named Trita Parsi and NIAC as the regime lobbyists. When state-aligned figures publicly describe you as part of their influence ecosystem, people start asking questions. This is not about conspiracy theatrics. It’s about patterns: – Consistent advocacy for policies that reduce pressure on the regime. – Documented communication with senior Iranian officials. – Political endorsements aligned with anti-pressure positions. – Public acknowledgment from regime-aligned media of influence networks. Influence operates through policy framing, “community representation,” and access to lawmakers. The Islamic Republic has invested heavily in soft power abroad because it understands something fundamental: shaping Western policy is cheaper than confronting it militarily. The question isn’t whether people are allowed to argue against military strikes. Of course they are. The question is transparency. Who are they connected to? Who amplifies them? Who benefits from their policy outcomes? In geopolitics, follow incentives, not slogans. History shows that authoritarian regimes don’t just export missiles. They export narratives. And those narratives travel through institutions that claim to represent communities. When you see coordinated messaging, recurring endorsements, and documented back-channel access, it’s not irrational to ask: whose strategic objectives are being served? Power moves through relationships.

Watch closely who is loudly opposing any strike on the Islamic Republic’s military infrastructure. Then look at who endorsed them. A recurring name appears: NIAC Action, the political arm of the National Iranian American Council. NIAC presents itself as a voice for Iranian-Americans. That’s the branding. The controversy begins when you examine its leadership history and political activity. It was founded by Trita Parsi (alongside others, including Siamak Namazi). Over the years, many Iranian dissidents and diaspora activists have accused NIAC of advocating positions that align closely with the Islamic Republic’s foreign policy goals, particularly around sanctions relief and nuclear negotiations. In 2012, Parsi sued an Iranian-American activist for defamation over claims that NIAC functioned as a regime lobby. During court discovery, internal emails became public. Those documents showed that Parsi had extensive communications with Iranian officials, including Javad Zarif. Later, Zarif became foreign minister and a central figure in negotiating the nuclear deal. The released emails revealed coordination of meetings, messaging discussions, and efforts to facilitate access between Iranian officials and U.S. policymakers. Parsi has argued these contacts were normal diplomatic engagement. But the pattern went beyond neutral policy advocacy and into organized influence aligned with Tehran’s strategic interests. That distinction matters. Diplomacy is not the same thing as lobbying on behalf of a foreign regime. But the boundary between them can blur, and that blur is exactly where influence operates. Fast-forward to recent debates. On Iranian state media, analyst Foad Izadi, a frequent voice on Iran’s state broadcaster, openly discussed lobbying networks in the U.S. and named Trita Parsi and NIAC as the regime lobbyists. When state-aligned figures publicly describe you as part of their influence ecosystem, people start asking questions. This is not about conspiracy theatrics. It’s about patterns: – Consistent advocacy for policies that reduce pressure on the regime. – Documented communication with senior Iranian officials. – Political endorsements aligned with anti-pressure positions. – Public acknowledgment from regime-aligned media of influence networks. Influence operates through policy framing, “community representation,” and access to lawmakers. The Islamic Republic has invested heavily in soft power abroad because it understands something fundamental: shaping Western policy is cheaper than confronting it militarily. The question isn’t whether people are allowed to argue against military strikes. Of course they are. The question is transparency. Who are they connected to? Who amplifies them? Who benefits from their policy outcomes? In geopolitics, follow incentives, not slogans. History shows that authoritarian regimes don’t just export missiles. They export narratives. And those narratives travel through institutions that claim to represent communities. When you see coordinated messaging, recurring endorsements, and documented back-channel access, it’s not irrational to ask: whose strategic objectives are being served? Power moves through relationships.

Sana Ebrahimi Ledene

16,259 views • 5 months ago

🇺🇸 VICE PRESIDENT JD VANCE: “We have built a foreign policy of hectoring, moralizing, and lecturing countries that don’t want anything to do with it. The Chinese have a foreign policy of building roads, bridges, and feeding poor people.”

🇺🇸 VICE PRESIDENT JD VANCE: “We have built a foreign policy of hectoring, moralizing, and lecturing countries that don’t want anything to do with it. The Chinese have a foreign policy of building roads, bridges, and feeding poor people.”

samirah

1,904,697 views • 8 months ago