Articles on 8 January 2026

‘Natgrid’, the Search Engine of Digital Authoritarianism

Context

• The 2008 Mumbai attacks, or 26/11, marked a pivotal transformation in India’s security governance.
• The televised siege and subsequent political debate centred on intelligence failure, particularly the inability to consolidate fragmented information about the movements and identity of the attackers.
• This event created an urgent climate for reform and opened political space for technological expansion within the national security apparatus.
• The most ambitious of these expansions was the National Intelligence Grid (NATGRID), envisioned as a centralized data infrastructure capable of supporting counter-terrorism operations.
• Over time, however, NATGRID has evolved into a broader surveillance architecture with legal, constitutional, and societal implications.

Origin, Expansion and Transformation of NATGRID

• Origins: A Technological Fix for Security Gaps

  • In the aftermath of the attacks, policymakers advanced a compelling counterfactual: had data trail fragments been aggregated and analysed in time, the attack might have been prevented.
  • NATGRID emerged as the institutional embodiment of this belief. Designed to allow multiple security agencies to query a wide range of governmental databases, it promised technological interoperability across organizational silos.
  • The project was approved through executive action rather than parliamentary legislation, raising concerns about the absence of statutory safeguards, privacy protections, and democratic oversight.
  • Although initially plagued by delays that fuelled scepticism, NATGRID would gradually mature into a functional system rather than a symbolic response.

• Expansion and Transformation

  • Recent developments indicate that NATGRID has undergone both operational scaling and conceptual broadening.
  • Data request volumes number in the tens of thousands each month, flowing not only from central intelligence units but also from state-level police agencies.
  • What began as a counter-terror resource has migrated into routine policing functions, expanding the scope of permissible queries and investigators with access.
  • More significant still is its integration with the National Population Register (NPR), a comprehensive demographic database containing detailed information on households and lineages.
  • The NPR’s political resonance, given its proximity to citizenship debates, intensifies concerns about population-wide profiling.
  • Through this integration, NATGRID appears to transition from monitoring specific security threats to mapping entire populations and their relational linkages.
  • Alongside integration, NATGRID now employs advanced analytical tools.
  • Platforms capable of entity resolution link fragmented digital identities across databases, while facial recognition systems trawl identity and telecommunications records.
  • In combination with machine learning models capable of predictive inference, NATGRID shifts from reactive investigation toward anticipatory surveillance.

New Risks: Bias and Scale in Algorithmic Policing

• Two contemporary risks distinguish this surveillance paradigm from earlier forms. The first lies in algorithmic bias.
• Data-driven policing systems do not operate on neutral ground; they inherit distortions embedded in the data they ingest.
• In settings where suspicion already falls unevenly along caste, religious, or geographic lines, analytics risk amplifying inequities under a veneer of objectivity.
• The consequences are unevenly distributed: administrative inconvenience for some, existential vulnerability for others.
• The second is the tyranny of scale. While officials emphasize query logging and sensitivity classifications as safeguards, procedural tracking does little to prevent normalisation when tens of thousands of queries are executed monthly.
• Without independent oversight, internal logging becomes administrative ritual, not accountability.

Misdiagnosing the Security Problem

• Reliance on expansive surveillance technology obscures a more fundamental lesson.
• The failures exposed during 26/11 stemmed less from insufficient data than from institutional fragility: inadequate training, poor coordination, and lack of professional autonomy.
• Security also suffers from political interference and informational opacity, conditions that technological aggregation alone cannot remedy.
• As NATGRID extends into ordinary policing, the original justification of preventing catastrophic terror recedes, while the risks to civil liberties intensify.

The Erosion of Oversight

• Despite the Supreme Court’s recognition of a constitutional right to privacy in 2017, national surveillance programs remain largely unexamined by legislative or judicial mechanisms.
• Public discourse has narrowed, with cultural narratives and political rhetoric rendering criticism of security institutions suspect or unpatriotic.
• In such an environment, even evaluating subsequent attacks or investigating institutional failures becomes politically fraught.

Conclusion

• The shock of 26/11 reshaped India’s security imagination, but the remedy pursued has been technologically expansive and democratically thin.
• NATGRID illustrates a shift from targeted counter-terrorism toward population-wide surveillance, enabled by modern analytics and legitimized through fear.
• Strengthening national security ultimately requires robust institutions, transparent intelligence practices, and independent oversight.
• Without these foundations, surveillance risks normalization, fostering an architecture of suspicion at the expense of democratic accountability.

‘Natgrid’, the Search Engine of Digital Authoritarianism FAQs

 Q1. What triggered the creation of NATGRID?
Ans. NATGRID was created in response to perceived intelligence failures during the 2008 Mumbai attacks.

Q2. How was NATGRID originally justified by policymakers?
Ans. It was justified as a technological solution to aggregate fragmented data for counter-terrorism purposes.

Q3. Why is the integration with the National Population Register considered significant?
Ans. It is significant because it shifts NATGRID from tracking specific threats to mapping entire populations.

Q4. What are the two main risks associated with NATGRID’s evolution?
Ans. The main risks are algorithmic bias and large-scale surveillance without independent oversight.

Q5. What does the analysis argue is needed for genuine security improvement?
Ans. Genuine security improvement requires institutional reform, transparency, and democratic oversight rather than mass surveillance.

Source: The Hindu

Fine-tune this Signal to Sharpen India’s AMR Battle

Context

• Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s remarks on antimicrobial resistance (AMR) during the 129th edition of Mann Ki Baat on December 28, 2025 may represent a pivotal moment for national awareness and policy focus.
• His statements have been viewed as an opportunity for collective recognition in addressing what many medical experts regard as India’s next major public health crisis.

From Specialist Concern to Mass Awareness

• For years, AMR has occupied a largely technical space dominated by infectious disease experts, health institutions, and government bodies.
• Strategic interventions such as the National Action Plan on AMR and targeted regulatory actions against antibiotic misuse have been initiated, yet these measures have not significantly altered public behaviour.
• PM Modi’s address directly confronted the behavioural roots of AMR, emphasizing thoughtless and indiscriminate use of antibiotics and cautioning against self-medication.
• By referencing Indian Council of Medical Research data illustrating decreased antibiotic efficacy against common infections such as pneumonia and urinary tract infections, the speech connected scientific evidence with everyday risks.
• His closing advisory, Avoid taking medicines by yourself, particularly antibiotics, transformed AMR from an abstract clinical problem into a matter of individual and collective responsibility.
• This mainstreaming of AMR may enable broader societal engagement, particularly because public behaviour is a major determinant of resistance patterns.
• Expanding awareness at the population level targets the widest base of influence, potentially achieving more than specialized policy instruments alone.

The Limits of Awareness and the Need for Structured Surveillance

• The Limits of Awareness

  • Awareness, however, addresses only one dimension of a problem that has grown into a multi-sectoral crisis.
  • AMR in India draws from intersecting drivers involving human health, animal health, agriculture, and environmental contamination.
  • A One Health approach has emerged as the most coherent framework for coordinating interventions across these domains.
  • Drug use in livestock production, untreated discharge of pharmaceutical waste, and hospital-based infections contribute cumulatively to resistance patterns, demanding a shift from siloed action to integrated governance.

• Need for Structured Surveillance

  • At the current juncture, surveillance capacity is a critical bottleneck.
  • Comprehensive AMR surveillance remains limited in scale, geographical coverage, and institutional diversity.
  • Although the National AMR Surveillance Network (NARS-Net), established in 2013, now includes 60 sentinel laboratories, national reporting to the World Health Organization’s GLASS system in 2023 contained data from only 41 sites across 31 States and Union Territories.
  • Urban tertiary hospitals dominate these datasets, whereas secondary and primary care centres, where a large portion of antibiotic prescriptions occur, remain sparsely represented.
  • This skews the national picture and impedes the ability to detect emerging resistance patterns outside major metropolitan centres.
  • Inclusion of private healthcare providers is also essential; India’s healthcare landscape involves substantial private sector participation, particularly for outpatient consultations and inpatient care in non-urban areas.

Political Will, Public Infrastructure, and the Challenge Ahead

• The 2015 WHO Global Action Plan on AMR outlines five central pillars: raising awareness, strengthening surveillance and research, reducing infections, optimising antimicrobial use, and incentivising innovation.
• PM Modi’s remarks advance the awareness pillar, but durable progress across the remaining pillars requires sustained political will and resource allocation.
• Surveillance expansion demands substantial investments in laboratory infrastructure, trained personnel, diagnostic systems, and data integration, areas that typically receive limited health budgeting.
• Reducing infection rates depends on improved sanitation, vaccination coverage, and hospital infection control practices, while optimization of antibiotic use requires both prescriber discipline and retail regulation.
• India’s large informal pharmaceutical market and the ease of antibiotic procurement without prescription remain significant obstacles.
• Long-term sustainability also hinges on support for new drug discovery, diagnostics, and vaccines, fields that carry high development costs and uncertain commercial returns.
• Global experience demonstrates that without structured incentive mechanisms, pharmaceutical innovation in antibiotics stagnates even as resistance accelerates.

Conclusion

• PM Modi’s speech represents a potentially transformative moment for AMR governance by shifting it from a specialized policy discourse to a matter of public concern.
• Yet AMR remains a systemic crisis requiring coordinated interventions rooted in surveillance, regulation, infrastructure, and multi-sectoral cooperation.
• Awareness may catalyse change, but only sustained action can ensure that resistance patterns stabilize rather than escalate.

Fine-tune this Signal to Sharpen India’s AMR Battle FAQs

Q1. What issue did the Prime Minister highlight in his 2025 broadcast?
Ans. He highlighted antimicrobial resistance as a growing public health concern in India.

Q2. Why was his statement considered significant?
Ans. It brought the topic out of specialist circles and into mainstream public awareness.

Q3. What behavioural factor contributes most to AMR in India?
Ans. Self-medication and the irrational use of antibiotics contribute most to AMR.

Q4. Why is surveillance expansion important for addressing AMR?
Ans. Surveillance expansion is important because current data excludes many non-urban and lower-tier healthcare settings.

Q5. What broader framework is needed to effectively tackle AMR?
Ans. A One Health framework is needed because AMR spans human, animal, and environmental health.

Source: The Hindu