Conference Program

India is a country characterized by its religious, ethnic, and linguistic diversity. Approximately 200 million Muslims, accounting for around 15% of the population, coexist with an 80% Hindu majority, positioning them as the largest minority group. However, since the ascent of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) to power in 2014, specifically under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, there has been an observable increase in anti-Muslim rhetoric, which has complex historical roots, premised on the idea that Indian identity is shaped by the interplay of secularism, communalism, and Hinduism.

Modi has played a significant role in the current political landscape. His enduring popularity is influenced by various factors, such as strong nationalism, the promotion of Hindutva, and strategic utilization of mainstream media. Modi's leadership style combines elements of nativist populism, emphasizing Hindutva and a technocratic approach. Despite facing criticism for the treatment of religious minorities, his effective communication skills and populist image contribute to the consolidation and expansion of the regime in electoral politics.

This chapter aims to identify the specific characteristics of Islamophobia in India through a brief analysis of past dynamics, contributing to the understanding of the situation in the country from 2014 to 2023, encompassing the two periods of Modi's tenure in power. The goal is to comprehend how populism in the largest democracy in the world contests and challenges the international order. This is achieved by examining secularism and communalism as focal points of study to understand the success of Modi and the BJP in the electoral process.

The political debate on migration has a long history, and in recent decades immigration has become a contentious issue in Europe, especially in the context of securitizing this phenomenon. Migrations are being considered through the lens of increased threats to host societies and European stakeholders. The dynamics of the transformation of the geopolitical environment, increased mobility of people, goods, and ideas, and the activities of non-state actors in the international arena give physical and mental borders a new dimension. The catalog of threats to state security has expanded to include irregular migrations from outside of Europe as well. At the EU level, the intensity of migration generates political tensions and divisions, and migration from Africa is treated as a political instrument.

One of the most popular misperception is that Africa is on the move and heading towards Europe by crossing the Mediterranean Sea by sea route, and Europe itself is at the threshold of another crisis. The stereotypes of African migrants, perpetuated over the years, are recognized as elements of epistemic violence, and this perspective is adopted in the presentation. It is also part of a dichotomous division of 'us' versus 'them,' which greatly fuels European populism, shaping narratives of threats posed by migrants and narratives of borders. The aim of the presentation is to analyze the misperception of migration in the EU as a crisis and the impact of this popular narrative on migration policy in terms of protecting the EU's external borders.

The paper assesses if the dynamics of the mobilization of Frontex to the external EU borders of member states (MS) can be correlated with the representation of the right and radical right (RRR) in national political systems. Politicization and securitization of the migrant have been increasing in the EU, triggering enchained trends of securitization of migration and asylum management (Lénonard and Kaunert, 2020). The reinforcement of Frontex is an example of that. In parallel, electoral representation of the radical right has been rising and pressing the moderate right agendas. Nativism, expressed through a securitized rhetoric towards the migrant, is one of their main programmatic issues (Mudde, 2020). With this background, we hypothesize that the dynamics of the intervention of Frontex in MS can be correlated with the level of representativeness of (radical) right parties in national political systems and not only with the effective pressure of migration influxes in national external EU borders. The mobilization of Frontex for the external borders is defined as a dependent variable of two independent variables: (i) the migration pressure a MS faces (ii) and the level of representation of the RRR in the national political systems. The empirical analysis is quantitative, based on data collected to achieve three different indicators: (i) dynamics of national mobilization of Frontex, (ii) national representation of right and RRP, (iii) numbers of migration influxes for member states. The analysis covers the period 2008-2022, and assesses country longitudinal variations and cross-country comparisons. MS to analyze are to be defined.

Currently, Sweden has a government supported by Swedish Democrats ( s. Sverigedemokraterna, SD ). SD since the 2022 elections is the second-strongest political party in Riksdag and the strongest party in the centre-right political block. They are led by Jimmie Åkesson, the person who has been in this party since the early years of their existence. He started in SD’s youth and became a leader in 2005 and then he started internal reformation of this party. Swedish Democrats started as an ultra-nationalist organization with racist and nazist origins, in Sweden named the brown origin. The party changed its politics during the term of Jimmie Åkesson changed the party internally. Since 2010 this party has been in the Riksdag and in the early years of being in the Swedish parliament, they were isolated by other parties from different blocks. The centre-right block led by current PM Ulf Kristersson changed their approach to SD during the 2018-2022 term of Riksdag. They became a member of the centre-right block.

Two main goals of this paper are to determine: First "Could rising Swedish populism be a problem for international society and why yes or no?, Second: How Swedish populists see European integration, membership in NATO and authoritarianism in the world?

Research methods used in the research are analysis of primary and secondary sources, data analysis and case study. In research, sources like political party programs and statements of the main politicians from these party will be used.

Of late, India has witnessed new nationalism that tends to be exclusionary, confining itself from global community, and above all, the process of ‘otherisation’ within. It doesn’t allow attainment of all the rights by all people/citizens, instead, it allows for exclusiveness, privileging and appropriation of all the rights only by supposedly the original/native-born/dominant/majority community (along the lines of ethnic/linguistic or religious identity). The paper will share fresh insights to see how dominant religion is being used in politics and giving rise to political polarization and mass mobilization along religious lines.

The paper emphasizes that New Nationalism poses serious threat to democratic consensus/institutions, liberal international order and leads to authoritarianism, majoritarianism, nativism, centralization/personalization of power and otherisation of certain sections of the society. Moreover,it facilitates majoritarian aspects of populism which endangers liberal democracy.The paper would investigate how various kinds of fear (real/perceived), humiliation (existing/historical), anxieties and frustration/dissatisfaction lead to New Nationalism. The paper would attempt to understand this process in India and beyond.The paper would interpret how New Nationalisms are giving rise to populism, authoritarianism and ethno/religious nationalism. During Covid-19 pandemic,some of the democracies have witnessed curtailment in democratic rights of the citizens.Considering the example from India,it would also examine the process through which democratic backsliding takes place and gives rise to authoritarian regimes in general. Further,paper would underline what are the ways in which populism challenges and contests the international liberal order; the response of international actors to it; the ramifications of populist politics on international cooperation and international institutions.