I. The Calculus of Treachery and the Geopolitical Hotpot:
Whenever world leaders gather at major conferences, the global audience holds its breath without fail, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who heads the world’s most populous democracy, found to be at the very centre of the emerging powers attending the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) along with Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin. The scenario almost immediately raises any security threat up to the level of an international crisis.
As a result, the unthinkable, the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) planned the assassination of the Indian Prime Minister during SCO summit in China, has recently, however, shocked the world with its digital presence. The sensational accusation directly targets the leader of a nation widely seen as the United States’ key strategic ally in the Indo-Pacific, automatically and severely damaging trust between Delhi and Washington. Rather than fading, the controversy intensifies, further straining strategic alignments, eroding public trust in democratic institutions, and fueling an information war where such claims become potent weapons.
The alleged plot’s location at the SCO summit in China was deliberate and made the U.S. look like the aggressor, China as the possibly unwitting—or knowingly—secure host that failed, and India as the victim, hence implicating three global powers at once. This situation intensifies U.S.-China relations and gives India immediate strengthening of its narrative about its own high-level security architecture.
II. The Ghost in the Machine: Tracing the SCO Plot Allegation
The Alleged Chain of Events (Rumour Reconstruction)
The narratives that the supporters (the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh RSS) spread were the ones that created a typical conspiratorial framework. The allegations that the U.S. intelligence community eliminates world leaders opposing its global agenda gained global attention; however, the complete absence of concrete operational details from the public domain strongly indicates that these claims were purely speculative.
This particular conspiracy is said to be part of a more extensive political narrative, which is called the “Conspiratorial Trifecta” in the country. It declares that not only the American political figures, especially the former President Donald J. Trump, are in collusion with the CIA and the nebulous “Deep State,” but they also aim at overthrowing PM Modi and thus be a hindrance to India’s fast taking over the world. They even claim that the plot is already underway, setting arbitrary deadlines for Modi’s removal and proposing tactics such as targeting ruling party members in Parliament and creating internal divisions within major parties.
The Absence of Substance
Analysts, however, despite the quite impressive nature of the accusation, point to the fact that there is absolutely no verifiable intelligence to back the CIA/SCO story. That is why there are no documents of operational leaks, no names of operatives given and no indictments (in contrast to later, verifiable plots), and most importantly, neither has the Indian government nor the U.S. government provided any official confirmation or evidence that is backing this sensational claim. The domain specialists warned that the reports should not be spread without verification as they would create huge international relations issues.
In addition, tying the CIA conspiracy to the vague “Deep State” not only helps in gaining nationalist support but also depicts PM Modi as an important, aiming figure who is taking on both the internal and external disruptors. This focus on national security threat perception not only consolidates his political power but also energizes his electoral base.
III. The Definitive Verdict: Speculation Justified
The process of intelligence analysis must move from simply saying what the claim is to giving a clear, expert-level judgment. The CIA/SCO conspiracy against PM Modi is nothing but a conjecture, which is essentially designed and used for information warfare to purify and get specific political goals.
Pillar 1: Lack of Diplomatic Engagement
In cases where actual, verifiable plots involving countries such as the U.S. Department of Justice (DoJ) indictment against Indian operatives come to light, high-level diplomatic dialogue takes place, and these may involve communication between national security advisors, formation of formal inquiry committees, and issuing of official statements.
The complete lack of any formal diplomatic fallout, warnings at the government level, or an official Indian inquiry specifically concerning the SCO plot all serve to prove its credibility has no foundation. If a U.S. intelligence operation had truly endangered the life of a sitting Indian Prime Minister in a foreign land, it would straight away lead to a drastic and violent breakdown of bilateral relations, total security breach, and an investigation of unprecedented scale in Delhi. The fact that there is no such official investigation or diplomatic protest indicates that the key decision-makers are treating the claim as a baseless political situation.
Pillar 2: Intelligence Calculus Failure
No intelligence service would accept the operational risks of assassinating a leader of India’s calibre at a multilateral summit in sensitive China, because such an act violates standard intelligence practices and would jeopardize strategic partnerships. A CIA operation with such a scale would be geopolitically unacceptable and bring about consequences such as direct conflict, total dismantling of the alliance, and worldwide condemnation. The intelligence agencies rely on a calculated risk-reward analysis; the possible reward (removing Modi) would never surpass the certainty of catastrophic international backlash and the instant loss of U.S. strategic goals in Asia. Thus, the plot is not operationally plausible.
Pillar 3: The Source’s Bias and Counter-Narrative Deployment
The claim’s origins—rooted in sources closely linked to the ruling party—perfectly align with established patterns of digital propaganda operations. These campaigns, often identified in reports as Disinfo, are known to weave “elaborate conspiracy theories built on half-truths” to discredit critics and deflect international scrutiny.
The propagation of the narrative conveying that the CIA is trying to assassinate Modi acts as a very important political insulating strategy since it changes the whole narrative from India’s supposed policy of transnational repression to the country’s classification as a foreign aggression victim. This gives the ruling group the liberty to skip tricky inquiries about the activities of its foreign intelligence agency.
IV. The Weaponization of Conspiracy: Propaganda and Defence Mechanisms
Information Laundering and Disinformation
The CIA and SCO’s assertions align closely with reported information operations aimed at domestic political mobilization and international deflection. One such operation, allegedly linked to certain Indian intelligence officers, reportedly generates “elaborate conspiracy theories based on half-truths” to discredit critics and perceived adversaries. The CIA/SCO conspiracy theory is along the same lines: a claim of high impact but low evidence wanting to resonate politically and emotionally to the maximum extent. The rumour’s timing – immediately following the U.S. indictment – directly pushed India to conduct discreet yet sensitive diplomatic and internal investigations into the Gurpatwant Singh Pannun case, revealing its calculated intent.
By pushing the story that the U.S. is aiming at PM Modi, the Indian government is, in fact, protecting itself against criticism regarding the Hardeep Singh Nijjar and Pannun murder cases. Thus, the whole scenario has moved from, “Was India behind foreign assassination?” to, “The West is out to destabilize India’s strong leader.” This method effectively protects the intelligence agency (R&AW) from both public scrutiny and political accountability, which helps them keep their operational mandate intact.
Such “soft repression” consisting of the spreading of complicated conspiracy theories, is parallel to the purported physical repression (assassination plots) and showcases a very well-coordinated, integrated state security strategy. Hard power (alleged R&AW physical operations) generates a diplomatic crisis; soft power (disinformation campaigns through aligned media) instantly comanages the crisis by shifting blame and polarizing the domestic audience.
The Posture of Strategic Victimhood
A critical and remarkable trend that is becoming more prominent in global politics is the taking of the victim’s position by leading countries and claiming to be the targets of ‘deep state’ actors’ making, in this way, their aggressive national security measures more authentic. India presents the CIA/SCO plot as the main proof for its victimizing posture, labelling its own intelligence activities as essential responses to the ubiquitous foreign threat.
Among the current conjectures, we still must take into consideration that Prime Minister Modi has had to deal with non-Western powers and their historical threats. These instances include the 2004 assassination conspiracy by the militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba—exposed through the testimonies of David Headley and Tahawwur Rana—and a 2018 domestic Maoist plot planning a “Rajiv Gandhi-type incident” during a roadshow. These historical cases demonstrate that threats to Modi’s life are real; however, the current claim of CIA involvement during the SCO summit appears to be a politically motivated construct.
Silencing Critics
Moreover, the conspiracy theories put forward in this context are first and foremost aimed at domestic critics’ silencing outside the country’s borders. Reports suggest that these theories target U.S.-based NGOs and activists—often labelled as “human rights” organizations and critics of the ruling party—for highlighting government violations of human rights, making them vulnerable to accusations of antisemitism and Islamophobia. This new form of control, digital repression, transforms the societal fear of foreign conspiracies into justification for silencing dissent both at home and abroad. Consequently, critics face not only physical danger but also harsh public condemnation, fueled by state-aligned media that deliberately mark them as targets.
Beyond what was publicly revealed, a possible scenario was:
The Prime Minister of India and President of Russia, Narendra Modi and Vladimir Putin respectively, held a private meeting at the SCO Summit during which they exchanged opinions on a wide range of strategic matters. Besides, they examined the possible future of cooperation between their countries and the spheres of trade, fertilisers, space, security, culture, economy, finance, and energy- all the vital elements of the India-Russia relationship. They were particularly focusing on the trade of energy and fertilisers against the backdrop of the changing global scenario. The leaders also shared their thoughts on international and area development including the case of Ukraine where Modi emphasized the importance of a fast and peaceful settlement.
Within the SCO context, Modi reiterated India’s 3-pillar vision of “Security, Connectivity, and Opportunity” while concurrently condemning “double standards” about terrorism and advocating for a united global response. After the summit, Modi moved with Putin in the Russian leader’s Aurus Senat limousine for an extended non-official meeting of about 50 minutes that most probably covered similar important topics as their official discussions. This informal but significant encounter showed their friendship has grown and the continuity of the India-Russia relationship has been reaffirmed, even as New Delhi navigates its strategic ties with other world powers carefully.
V. Recalibrating Risk in the Indo-Pacific:
The investigation into the alleged CIA plot to assassinate Prime Minister Modi at the SCO summit has reached a definitive conclusion: the sensational claim is completely unfounded—a politically motivated fabrication engineered to manipulate narratives and counter U.S. influence. Department of Justice indictment against Indian officials and the Canadian intelligence assessments. The lack of any official confirmation whatsoever, or any diplomatic follow-up, and the absence of any plausible operational scenario completely blows away the CIA/SCO story.
Restoring diplomatic integrity is now of utmost importance. India must sustain a credible investigation while demonstrating its commitment to the rule of law by cooperating with the West on the Pannun case, thereby reaffirming trust and strengthening its partnerships with key Western allies. The U.S. should keep on insisting on the same democratic principles as the ones in place for its strategic partner, while at the same time very cautiously managing the delicate balance required for the cooperative strategy against the common geopolitical enemies.
What threatens the Indo-Pacific security structure is not the imaginary CIA conspiracy but the affirmed pattern of alleged international repression which is being done by a key partner in the alliance. Authorities should act quickly and reliably upon recalibrating their matrices of risks as acknowledging that a big partner country might be doing extralegal operations against dissidents residing in its territories, thus, causing a very unstable situation for alliances and raising a challenge for the norms of international sovereignty. Only factual intelligence can do so stripping from conspiratorial fabrication, thus, guaranteeing stability and preserving the crucial but now strained geopolitical partnership. The global community insists on transparency, thus, making India its commitment to the rule of law everywhere. The shadow state must be subject to the light of objective scrutiny.
