It has increasingly become a pattern for the United States to comment on the internal matters of other nations, often combining criticism with strong narratives about governance and rights. This trend has remained steady across different administrations. In its latest report for 2026, the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) has once again focused on India, recommending that the US government impose sanctions on the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and the Research and Analysis Wing (RA&W).

The Commission has also repeated its call for India to be designated as a “Country of Particular Concern,” alleging that the country is “engaging in and tolerating systematic, ongoing, and egregious religious freedom violations.” The report largely builds on earlier narratives, claiming that religious minorities, particularly Muslims and Christians, faced increased challenges in 2025. To support its position, the document highlights selected incidents of violence, arrests, and administrative actions, presenting them as evidence of a broader pattern.

At the same time, the USCIRF raised concerns about the use of laws such as the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA), Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), and National Register of Citizens (NRC), alleging that these were used to “target minorities.”

Focus on ‘Islamophobia’ After Kashmir Attack

The tone of the report becomes particularly noticeable in its discussion of the April 2025 attack in Kashmir. According to the USCIRF, “In April, three gunmen attacked a group of predominantly Hindu tourists in the Muslim-majority territory of Kashmir, killing 26 people. The perpetrators reportedly asked the victims to recite the Kalma, an Islamic verse, and killed those who were unable to do so. The attack sparked a five-day conflict between India and Pakistan and intensified anti-Muslim sentiment in India, including targeted attacks.”

The attack itself involved 26 victims, mostly Hindu men, who were reportedly identified based on religious markers before being killed. While the report acknowledges the brutality of the incident, it places significant emphasis on the aftermath, particularly the rise in what it terms “Islamophobia.” This framing has drawn attention, as it appears to weigh the reaction to the attack alongside the violence itself.

The Commission also expressed concern over India’s actions against illegal infiltration, particularly involving Bangladeshi and Rohingya individuals. It suggested that expulsions were carried out in an “inhumane” manner and claimed that some of those affected were Bengali-speaking Indian citizens, though it did not provide detailed sources to support this assertion.

Waqf Bill and Questions Around Property Control

In May 2025, the Indian government passed the Waqf Amendment Bill, aimed at restructuring the management of Waqf properties. The USCIRF described the move as an attempt to “target houses of worship to bring them under state control.”

The report also referred to protests linked to the legislation, including incidents in West Bengal where three people lost their lives. However, details surrounding the identities of victims and the broader context of the violence were not fully elaborated in the report.

The discussion around Waqf properties has been complex. Waqf Boards are among the largest landholders in India, and concerns have been raised over issues such as land disputes, administrative control, and allegations of irregularities. The Amendment Bill sought to address some of these concerns, including provisions related to property claims and governance. One key change was the removal of Section 40 of the Waqf Act 1995, which had allowed Waqf Boards to declare properties as Waqf.

There have also been local disputes, such as in Thiruchenthurai village near Trichy, Tamil Nadu, where residents raised objections after claims were made over land, including a centuries-old temple. Similar disputes have been reported in other parts of the country, contributing to an ongoing debate about land ownership and administrative authority.

Anti-Conversion Laws and Demographic Concerns

The USCIRF report also criticised anti-conversion laws in several Indian states. It noted that “Additionally, 12 out of 28 states maintain anti-conversion laws. In 2025, several state governments strengthened or introduced new laws to include harsher penalties and broader definitions of ‘religious conversion.’ In March, Arunachal Pradesh began pushing for the implementation of a decades-dormant anti-conversion law. This was met with widespread protests by hundreds of thousands of Christians.”

Arunachal Pradesh, a state with diverse indigenous traditions, has witnessed significant demographic changes over the decades. Census data shows shifts in religious composition, with the Christian population rising from 0.79% in 1971 to 30.26% in 2011. Other communities have also seen changes in their share of the population during this period.

The push to implement the Arunachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act (1978) was supported by groups across districts and tribes, who cited concerns about preserving traditional beliefs and cultural practices.

Similar concerns have been raised in Uttarakhand, where discussions around demographic changes and religious conversions have led to stricter laws. Reports have pointed to uneven growth rates among different communities, prompting debates about whether these changes are organic or influenced by external factors.

Conversion Practices and ‘Faith Healing’ Gatherings

The USCIRF also referred to proposed laws in states such as Maharashtra and Chhattisgarh, noting that “In July, Maharashtra state announced plans to introduce in December a tougher law to prevent religious conversions. Similarly, Chhattisgarh state announced in October that a proposed new anti-conversion law would target faith healing meetings.”

These “faith healing” gatherings, often referred to as Changai Sabhas, have been discussed in various reports and local accounts. Such events are described as involving claims of miraculous cures and spiritual intervention, sometimes drawing large gatherings. Critics argue that these meetings may influence vulnerable individuals, particularly those facing economic or health challenges.

Over the years, several cases have been reported involving alleged conversion networks across different regions, including Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan. These incidents have contributed to the broader debate on religious freedom, personal choice, and the role of regulation.

Love Jihad, Cow Protection, and Legal Interpretation

The USCIRF report also addressed the issue of interfaith marriages, stating that love jihad is a “derogatory term for conversions occurring in the context of interfaith marriages.”

This interpretation has been contested in India, where various cases have been reported involving allegations of coercion, identity concealment, and forced conversion linked to relationships. The issue remains highly debated, with differing views on whether it represents isolated incidents or a larger pattern.

Similarly, the Commission criticised cow protection laws, describing them as restrictions on minority rights. However, in India, the cow holds cultural and constitutional significance, with provisions for its protection included in the Directive Principles of State Policy.

Arrests and Legal Cases

In discussing arrests, the USCIRF cited cases such as that of James Watson and Manoj Govind Kolha, presenting them as examples of “imprisonment of religious minorities.” The report noted that the individuals were charged with offences including “hurting religious sentiment” and violations related to anti-black magic laws, including promises of “miracle cures” and prosperity.

The Commission also mentioned individuals linked to past protests and legal cases, including Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam, portraying them as examples of delayed justice. However, court records indicate multiple adjournments in some cases, including those requested by the accused.

In another instance, the USCIRF stated, “In May, authorities arrested a Muslim university professor, Ali Khan Mahmudabad, under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (India’s Criminal Code) for his comments on social media about Kashmir and subsequent attacks against Muslims in India.”

Legal proceedings in such cases have often included multiple charges, investigations, and court interventions, reflecting the complexity of the issues involved.

Recommendations and Diplomatic Implications

The USCIRF’s recommendations to the US government included designating India as a CPC, increasing scrutiny, and even imposing sanctions. The report urged authorities to “designate India as a ‘country of particular concern,’ or CPC, for engaging in and tolerating systematic, ongoing, and egregious religious freedom violations, as defined by the International Religious Freedom Act (IRFA).”

It also called on the US government to “press India to allow government entities such as USCIRF and the U.S. Department of State to conduct in-country assessments of religious freedom conditions.”

Among its more significant suggestions, the Commission stated: “Impose targeted sanctions on individuals and entities, such as India’s Research and Analysis Wing and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), for their responsibility and tolerance of severe violations of religious freedom by freezing those individuals’ or entities’ assets and/or barring their entry into the United States.”

These recommendations have sparked debate, particularly regarding their implications for diplomatic relations and national sovereignty. The idea of linking trade and security cooperation to religious freedom assessments was also proposed, along with suggestions to enforce provisions under US law affecting arms exports.

Political Reactions in India

The report has drawn varied reactions within India’s political landscape. Some opposition leaders have endorsed its findings. Congress leader Supriya Srinate wrote, “R???????? ???????????????????????? ???????? ???????????????????????? This has been recommended by the US govt commission USCIRF to the Trump administration. USCIRF says RSS is responsible for tolerance of severe violations of religious freedom in India. It also recommended designating India as a ‘Country of Particular Concern.’ USCIRF Asks For • Immediate ban on the RSS • Freezing of RSS assets • Ban entry of RSS people into the US Clearly, It wasn’t without a reason that after the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi, Sardar Patel had banned RSS. It fuels bigotry and fans communal tension and brings global shame to India.”

The Congress party’s official account also commented, stating, “???????????? ???????? ???????????????????????? ???????????????????????? ???? ???????????? ???????? ????????????.” This recommendation was made to the Donald Trump administration by the USCIRF, an official US government body. The USCIRF has warned that the RSS (Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh) poses a threat to people’s religious freedom. Its recommendations are clear: Ban the RSS immediately. Seize its assets. Prohibit entry into the US for RSS members. ⦿ Sardar Patel ji banned the RSS in India following the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi ji. An organisation that opposes the Constitution and advocates running the country according to the Manusmriti is poison to the unity and brotherhood of this nation.”

Journalist M K Venu also noted, “US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) has sought sanctions on RSS for the first time in its 2026 report. Overall for the 7th time in a row, it has recommended India as a Country of Particular Concern. But first time asked for sanctions from State Dept on RSS.”

Leadership and Background of USCIRF

Attention has also been drawn to the backgrounds of individuals associated with the Commission. The current Vice Chair, Asif Mahmood, has previously made statements regarding India’s policies and events. In one instance, he stated, “Religious freedom is a basic human right.”

He also commented on the Citizenship Amendment Act, saying, “Citizenship Amendment Act #CAA2019 being implemented in #India intentionally coincided with the #Ramadan2024 to send a clear message to the #Muslims of India that you are no longer equal citizens. Religious Freedom at its lowest and Religious Discrimination at its highest expose India and #Modi of its shallow Secular Claims.”

On another occasion, he remarked, “Is the #RamTemple inauguration by Prime Minister #Modi and circumstances around it the beginning of the end of Secular #India? ReligousFreedom is at its the lowest point in India today and civilized world needs to pay attention.”

He also posted, “Another sad and dark day for #Democracy #Justice and #SelfDeterminationRight for #Kashmiris in a long struggle for them and their children future. #US and rest of the Democratic world should pay attention on encroachment of #India in #Kashmir.”

Other members of the Commission have backgrounds linked to religious, academic, and policy organisations. According to official information, “She has long been an advocate for those persecuted for their faith. Prior to her public service, she volunteered with the Voice of the Martyrs organization providing tangible help to Christians persecuted for their faith.”

Similarly, another profile notes, “Meir Y. Soloveichik is Rabbi of Congregation Shearith Israel- the oldest Jewish congregation in the United States, the Director of the Straus Center for Torah and Western Thought at Yeshiva University, and a Senior Scholar at the Tikvah Fund. He graduated summa cum laude from Yeshiva University and received his PhD in religion from Princeton University.”

A Continuing Debate

The USCIRF, established in 1998, has been reporting on religious freedom globally for over two decades. Its reports on India have often generated strong reactions, reflecting differences in interpretation, political perspectives, and broader geopolitical considerations.

As the 2026 report circulates, it adds another chapter to an ongoing and often heated discussion about religious freedom, governance, and international scrutiny.