In May 2026, Norway’s largest daily newspaper, Aftenposten, sparked widespread international outrage by publishing a cartoon depicting Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi as a snake charmer. Accompanying an opinion piece by journalist Frank Rossavik titled "A clever and slightly annoying man," the illustration portrayed Modi seated cross-legged, playing a flute to charm a fuel-station nozzle shaped like a snake rising from a basket. Ostensibly a commentary on India's pragmatism regarding global energy imports and its multi-aligned foreign policy, the cartoon instead collapsed into a textbook exhibition of media racism. By reviving one of the oldest, most patronizing colonial tropes used against the Indian subcontinent, the publication revealed the persistent undercurrent of Orientalism that continues to shape how the Western press views the Global South.
To understand why this cartoon is fundamentally racist, one must examine its visual semiotics and historical weight. The image of the "snake charmer" is not a benign piece of folklore; it was a deliberate construct of British colonial ethnography designed to justify imperial subjugation. During the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, depicting India as a land of mystics, snake charmers, and occultists served a vital political purpose. It framed India as a primitive, irrational, and pre-modern space that was fundamentally incapable of self-governance. By superimposing the face of a democratically elected leader of 1.4 billion people onto this specific caricature, the Norwegian media effectively stripped India of its political agency, modernity, and sovereign dignity. It reduced a complex nuclear power and a major global economy to a caricature of backwardness.
This depiction is a classic exercise in what the theorist Edward Said termed Orientalism—the systemic academic, literary, and artistic framework through which the West constructs the East as its exotic, stagnant, and backward "Other." Under the Orientalist gaze, the East is never allowed to be modern on its own terms. If India engages in sophisticated, multi-aligned diplomacy—balancing trade relations with both Western nations and energy suppliers—the Western media struggles to comprehend this through a framework of rational, sovereign self-interest. Instead, it must rely on exoticized metaphors of deception, mysticism, and "charming." By representing geopolitics as "snake charming," *Aftenposten* relied on an ethnocentric hierarchy where Western actions are viewed as "strategic and rational," while Indian diplomacy is rendered as "cunning, mysterious, and backward."
Moreover, the cartoon exposes a textbook case of anthropological ethnocentrism—the tendency to view one's own cultural and political frameworks as the universal standard, thereby rendering any deviation as abnormal, backward, or morally deficient. The European elite media frequently positions its own geopolitical alignments and moral postures as the objective baseline of global reason. When a rising power from the Global South refuses to act as a geopolitical vassal, the ethnocentric reflex kicks in: rather than attempting to understand the nation’s policies from its own standpoint, the observer defaults to patronizing caricatures.
What the Western commentariat fundamentally lacks is a lens of cultural relativism—a foundational methodological tool in anthropology that requires observers to suspend their own cultural biases to comprehend an alternative system's internal logic. Applied to global politics, a culturally relativistic approach would compel European journalists to evaluate India's multi-aligned foreign policy through the lens of India's own domestic imperatives, history, and socioeconomic realities. It would recognize that balancing energy imports to sustain the development of 1.4 billion people is a highly rational, self-interested calculation. Instead, by abandoning cultural relativism, Aftenposten reduces a calculated, sovereign strategy to a primitive, exoticized performance of "snake charming," proving that the European press struggles to see non-Western nations as modern rational actors.
The ultimate irony of the "snake charmer" trope is its utter disconnect from contemporary reality. PM Modi himself has famously remarked in international forums that while the West once stereotyped India as a land of snake charmers, it is now a land of "mouse charmers"—a reference to the nation’s
explosive growth in digital technology, software development, and space exploration. India currently boasts the world’s most advanced real-time digital public infrastructure (UPI), is a leader in space exploration with missions to the Moon and Mars, and is a crucial hub of global technology. To reduce a country driving global digital transformation to a cross-legged man with a flute is not just lazy journalism; it is an active, xenophobic denial of coevalness—the refusal to acknowledge that the "Other" exists in the same modern time and space as the observer.
In conclusion, the Aftenposten cartoon is not an isolated error of judgment, but a symptom of a broader structural pathology within Western media. It demonstrates how easily modern European commentary retreats into the comfort of nineteenth-century colonial fantasies when dealing with the rising, assertive powers of the East. As the geopolitical center of gravity continues to shift toward a multipolar world, Western media outlets must urgently dismantle their ethnocentric frameworks. True journalistic critique requires engaging with the complex realities of Global South nations as equal, modern sovereign entities, rather than retreating into the patronizing, racist caricatures of a bygone empire.
Image credit - https://share.google/RyDBks69je0DkWNRg
