The liberal economic module allows fair participation of countries in the international market; however, it also imposes certain restrictions, such as rebranding products to enforce intellectual property rights and fair play. For that reason, Indian importers have long imported Pakistan’s Khewra Pink Salt from third countries, including the United Arab Emirates (U.A.E.) and Sri Lanka, and rebranded it as Indian Himalayan Salt as a finished product. The attempt at rebranding is not limited to salt alone; it extends to Basmati rice, copies of Song Movies, and cultural elements.
There is a contextual reason behind this rebranding obsession. India, which has been trying to connect its roots to the Indus civilization and consider it the only proponent of civilizational values and products, however, is now making an attempt that is going wrong because, without indigeneity, it cannot even claim. On the other hand, India does not reserve the right to be the sole proponent of the Indus Civilization, as the Indus River flows through Pakistan. It has brought every element of civilization to Pakistan, which is often obscured in the media and dominant rhetoric.
Through rebranding and misrepresentation, Indian importers earn relatively higher profits by importing pink salt via third countries through established networks at lower prices of $60 to $80 per ton, then reselling it with high markups by simply putting a label on it. While Pakistan, which indigenously owns the Kehwra salt mines in Punjab, fulfills 95%-98% of global demand and earns just $120 million annually. By 2024, the global market value of Pakistan’s pink salt was $238 million; however, by 2033, stakeholders are ambitious to increase trade volume to $327 million.
Global trade operates under certain rules, limitations, and obligations, and such misbranding not only violates liberal economic principles but also contravenes sovereign branding rights. Khewra Rock Salt, registered under Pakistan’s Geographical Indications (GI) Act 2003 with the Pakistan Mineral Development Corporation (PMDC), grants Pakistan exclusive rights to the name “Khewra Pink Salt.” Therefore, Pink salt originates from Pakistan’s Salt Range, not from the Himalayas. Indian traders reprocess and rebrand it as “Himalayan pink salt” and label it “Made in India”.
Hence, such an attempt at rebranding and misrepresentation is a clear violation of the Geographical Indication Act and breaches the fundamental principles of trade, as well as international regulations under the World Trade Organization (WTO) TRIPS Agreement (Articles 22–24).
In the list, the other product is rice; India and Pakistan are engaged in a long-standing geopolitical and commercial battle over exclusive rights to the brand and export of basmati rice, particularly in the European Union (EU). However, Pakistan gained a decisive victory defending its rights to Basmati Rice and secured its own Geographical Indication in 2022, won decisive victories in New Zealand and Australia in 2025, and recognized it as a brand and Pakistani product.
In the defense domain, the Indian authority frequently claimed full indigenization of the Tejas fighter jet program. However, the objective reality tells a different story: the Tejas is powered by the US-made F404 engine, which is fully imported, with no domestic manufacturing and reliant on core technologies from Europe and Russia. This lag in ambition, such as “Make in India,” and in practice, is often criticized by its own air force officials, who call the Tejas Fighter jet a political product rather than a useful machine.
The obsession with replication is not over yet, but it has extended to cultural content as well. Bollywood has often been accused of copying Pakistani songs and music. Recent examples include the track “Danger” (Param Sundari), similar to “Laal Suit” from the drama Mannat Murad. Other cases involve “Bol Kaffara,” allegedly copied from Parlour Wali Larki, and the remake of the hit song “Pasoori.”
The tactics of rebranding are not limited to Pakistan’s goods; Indian importers also misbranded Chinese medical equipment with the “Made in India” tag, and surprisingly, this accounted for nearly 40% of exports. In February 2026, at the Artificial Intelligence Impact Summit, the Galgotias University professor was accused of falsely claiming that a Chinese Unitree Go2 robot was India’s Indigenous project, and they were embarrassed when the authorities asked them to leave the summit. In addition, they replicate the South Korean Soccer drone and falsely promote it as Made in India.
The push for misbranding and misrepresentation also has some political motives, as in September 2014, India launched the “Made in India project” under the Leadership of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). This initiative aimed to transform India into a manufacturing hub. However, without adequate resources and indigeneity, they cannot thrive in this domain; instead, they replicate and misbrand other countries’ products as their own to gain public validation. From rice to salt, to cultural, defense, and medical equipment, India cannot be a permanent supplier without a hold on production, but such tactics could affect its authenticity. Therefore, it is now obligatory for International trade regulatory bodies to intervene and make fair trade possible on merit.
