Matthew VanDyke mocks Indians after release? Brahma Chellaney calls it ‘shocking’, revives ‘soft state’ criticism

Geopolitical commentator Brahma Chellaney has criticised the Indian government for allowing American operative Matthew VanDyke and six Ukrainian nationals to leave the country after their arrest in a case involving alleged militant training and drone transfers to Myanmar. Calling their release following US Secretary of State Marco Rubio's intervention shocking, Chellaney said VanDyke was now openly mocking Indians through his posts on X.

Chellaney's remarks came after VanDyke posted on November 9 that he had spent more than six months in an Indian prison alongside six Ukrainians and promised to disclose details of the case through social media posts and media interviews over the coming months. In another post on November 11, VanDyke said the Indian government had clearly stated that he and the Ukrainians had done nothing against India and had only transited through the country on their way to Myanmar.

The commentator questioned India's decision to release the group, arguing that it reflected a pattern in which the government retreats from pursuing high-profile cases involving foreign nationals when diplomatic pressure builds. In an earlier post titled 'India the Perennial Soft State', Chellaney had also criticised the release, describing it as an example of India's failure to enforce accountability when powerful foreign interests are involved.

What Matthew VanDyke posted after his release from Indian prison

On November 9, VanDyke wrote on X that he and six Ukrainians had been imprisoned in India for more than six months. He described their detention as part of Russia's war against Ukraine and said he would reveal what he called shocking details about the case through future posts and media interviews.

In a subsequent post on November 11, VanDyke said the Indian government had stated that the group had not acted against India and had only travelled through the country while heading to Myanmar. He added that neither he nor the Ukrainians had any bad intentions towards India.

VanDyke also said he was surprised to see posts on X suggesting that some Indians were misinformed and angry with the group.

Chellaney described the posts as mocking Indians, particularly in light of the circumstances surrounding the group's arrest and subsequent release.

What Dr Savio Rodrigues had predicted about VanDyke's release

The release has also brought attention to an earlier post by strategic public affairs commentator Dr Savio Oliver Ignatius Rodrigues, who said in September that he had expected VanDyke to be freed following diplomatic pressure from the United States.

Rodrigues recalled that 48 hours after VanDyke's arrest, he had told Arnab Goswami that he believed the American operative would eventually be released. He said he had anticipated that the US Deep State would use its influence to push the right buttons in India to secure VanDyke's release.


In his post, Rodrigues said VanDyke had now walked out of Tihar Jail and had been permitted by a Delhi court to travel to the United States for a month.

He also highlighted the legal developments in the case, saying the NIA's September chargesheet invoked the Immigration and Foreigners Act rather than the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), while the agency maintained that its UAPA investigation was continuing. VanDyke subsequently obtained default bail, after which the court allowed him to travel to the US.

Rodrigues said the developments following his earlier prediction had borne out his assessment. However, he argued that the larger issue was whether India adequately understood the geopolitical networks, diplomatic pressure and strategic interests that could come into play when a foreign national linked to conflict zones becomes involved in a national-security investigation.

He called for India to examine the circumstances without emotion or fear.

Why Brahma Chellaney called the release shocking

In his latest criticism, Chellaney said it was shocking that an American veteran of covert operations in Ukraine and elsewhere, along with six Ukrainian associates with military backgrounds, had been allowed to walk free from an Indian prison despite facing serious charges.

According to NIA court filings cited by Chellaney, the seven were allegedly part of a larger international network that smuggled drones into India before routing them to Myanmar. The National Investigation Agency had initially invoked the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), India's anti-terrorism law, in the case.

Chellaney said the group was released after US Secretary of State Marco Rubio intervened on VanDyke's behalf. He also pointed to the NIA's expansion of the case, which linked the operatives to a drone attack on a Myanmar National Airlines commercial aircraft on February 20, 2026, while passengers were boarding for a domestic flight.

The commentator argued that the release raised questions about India's response to external diplomatic pressure and the use of its territory as an operational corridor for activities involving Myanmar.

Chellaney's 'India the Perennial Soft State' criticism

In an earlier post titled 'India the Perennial Soft State', Chellaney had described the release of VanDyke and the six Ukrainian drone specialists as more than an isolated legal reversal. He argued that it reflected a longstanding pattern in which Indian authorities initiate criminal proceedings against foreign nationals but subsequently retreat when geopolitical pressure intensifies.

He cited the Bhopal gas disaster, the Purulia arms-drop case, the Enrica Lexie Italian marines case and the Bofors scandal involving Ottavio Quattrocchi as examples of high-profile cases in which proceedings against foreign nationals or entities were diluted, abandoned or rendered inconsequential under diplomatic or strategic pressure.

Chellaney also questioned Ukraine's activities in the region, referring to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky's statements about sending more than 200 drone specialists to Persian Gulf states and other countries to train local forces and develop countermeasures. He argued that the arrests of the Ukrainian specialists and VanDyke had raised questions about Ukraine's alleged involvement in a proxy conflict against Myanmar's military government, using India's northeast as an operational route.

He concluded by questioning why India repeatedly struggles to enforce accountability in cases involving powerful foreign interests.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in the social media posts quoted in this article belong solely to their respective authors. The content has been sourced from X. ET.com does not endorse or take responsibility for the opinions expressed. Due credit is given to the original post authors.