case

In an era where technological paradigms shift with geopolitical winds, where design thinking must account for cultural diplomacy, and where engineering solutions intersect with national security concerns, India faces an epistemic crisis in higher education. The disciplinary silos that have long characterized our academic institutions—compartmentalizing knowledge into business, technology, design, and social sciences—have become intellectual anachronisms. This essay argues not merely for incremental curriculum reform but for a fundamental reconceptualization of knowledge production and transmission across disciplines, with particular emphasis on geopolitical literacy as an intellectual cornerstone for students of all academic backgrounds.

The Epistemological Divide: Empirical Evidence

The data regarding interdisciplinary education in India reveals a stark reality that demands urgent intellectual attention:

• Among India’s premier technological institutions, only 4.3% offer substantive coursework in international relations or geopolitical analysis (IIT Council Report, 2024).
• Within design schools, a mere 2.7% incorporate geopolitical considerations into their curriculum despite the growing importance of cultural diplomacy in global aesthetics (Design Education Review, 2023).
• Computer science programs show particular deficiency, with 91% offering no coursework on the geopolitics of technology, despite India’s positioning in the global digital economy (National Association of Software Companies, 2024).
• Engineering students receive, on average, less than 3.5 credit hours of humanities education throughout their entire degree program (All India Council for Technical Education, 2024).

When juxtaposed against global benchmarks—where leading institutions mandate cross-disciplinary exposure—this disciplinary isolation represents not merely a pedagogical oversight but an intellectual impoverishment with profound implications for India’s future.

The segregation of knowledge into discrete disciplines reflects a Cartesian reductionism increasingly at odds with contemporary epistemology. The complex problems facing modern societies—from climate adaptation to artificial intelligence governance—exist in what philosopher Horst Rittel termed the realm of “wicked problems,” resistant to solutions derived from any single knowledge domain.

Consider these intellectual frameworks that demand cross-disciplinary integration:

1. Systems Theory Perspective: Complex adaptive systems that characterize global affairs cannot be understood through linear causal models typical of siloed education. As philosopher Edgar Morin argues, understanding complexity requires transcending disciplinary boundaries.
2. Epistemic Justice: The privileging of certain knowledge forms (technical, financial) over others (geopolitical, cultural) represents what philosopher Miranda Fricker identifies as “hermeneutical injustice”—denying students conceptual resources needed to interpret their reality.
3. Constructivist Learning Theory: Knowledge constructed through interdisciplinary engagement leads to cognitive frameworks better suited to navigating complexity, as educational theorist Jean Piaget established.
4. Critical Realism Philosophy: The stratified nature of reality (physical, biological, social, geopolitical) means that reduction to any single analytical level produces incomplete understanding—a perspective advanced by philosopher Roy Bhaskar.

NEP 2020: Potential and Contradictions

India’s National Education Policy 2020 ostensibly embraces interdisciplinary education, calling for “holistic and multidisciplinary education” as a foundational principle. Yet a critical analysis reveals significant contradictions between rhetoric and implementation mechanisms:

The policy states, “There will be no hard separations between arts and sciences, between curricular and extracurricular activities, or between vocational and academic streams.”

However, structural implementations reveal persistent disciplinary segregation:

• Credit allocation systems still predominantly favor disciplinary depth over breadth.
• Faculty evaluation metrics continue to reward specialization over integration.
• Administrative structures maintain departmental silos instead of problem-focused organization.
• Funding mechanisms disproportionately support traditional disciplinary research.

What emerges is a form of what sociologist Pierre Bourdieu would term “symbolic violence”—the appearance of change while reproducing existing knowledge hierarchies. True interdisciplinary education requires not merely allowing elective courses but fundamentally restructuring the epistemological foundations of higher education.

Geopolitics as Foundational Knowledge

The argument for geopolitical literacy extends beyond traditional international relations frameworks. Geopolitics offers essential intellectual scaffolding for understanding the context in which all disciplines operate:

For Design Students

Design does not occur in a geopolitical vacuum. Consider:

• The emergence of “strategic design” as a field addressing complex social problems requires understanding of geopolitical forces.
• Cultural diplomacy increasingly employs design as soft power—87% of nations have invested in design-forward cultural initiatives (UNESCO Cultural Indicators Report, 2023).
• Supply chain aesthetics are shaped by geopolitical realities—the movement of materials, labor, and production reflects power dynamics that designers must navigate.
• Design futures work must account for geopolitical scenarios—42% of failed design innovations demonstrated ignorance of geopolitical constraints (Design Management Institute, 2024).

For Technology Students

The bifurcation of global technology ecosystems along geopolitical lines demands attention:

• Semiconductor supply chains have become explicitly geopolitical, with India’s positioning requiring strategic understanding—the $10 billion India Semiconductor Mission operates in a geopolitical context students must comprehend.
• Data sovereignty regulations reflect geopolitical tensions—76% of new technology regulations in India’s key export markets derive from geopolitical considerations (MEITY Analysis, 2023).
• AI ethics frameworks diverge along geopolitical lines, with 63% of major differences attributable to geopolitical positioning rather than technical considerations (AI Ethics Global Review, 2024).
• Technology standards-setting processes have become battlegrounds for national influence—participation requires diplomatic as well as technical expertise.

For Other Non-Social Science Fields

• Agriculture students: 71% of agricultural market disruptions in the past decade stemmed from geopolitical events rather than climate or technology factors.
• Medical students: Global health security increasingly operates as a function of geopolitical relationships—pandemic response coordination shows an 84% correlation with geopolitical alliance structures.
• Architecture students: Urban resilience planning now incorporates geopolitical risk assessment in 67% of major global architectural firms.

Reimagining Interdisciplinary Education

Meaningful interdisciplinary education must transcend the tokenism of isolated courses to embrace what philosopher Hannah Arendt termed “praxis”—reflective action informed by theoretical understanding. This requires

Structural Reforms

1. Epistemic Integration: Core courses should integrate knowledge across disciplines rather than merely adding electives—for example, “Geopolitics of Design” rather than “Design” plus “Geopolitics.”
2. Faculty Development: Create joint appointments across departments and invest in faculty capacity to teach across disciplinary boundaries.
3. Assessment Revolution: Move beyond discipline-specific metrics to evaluate students’ ability to synthesize knowledge across domains.
4. Institutional Architecture: Reorganize academic units around problems rather than disciplines—establishing centers for “Technology Governance” rather than separate computer science and political science departments.

Pedagogical Innovations

1. Wicked Problem Studios: Project-based learning focused on complex challenges requiring multiple knowledge domains
2. Simulation-Based Learning: Complex geopolitical simulations where students from different disciplines must collaborate to address scenarios
3. Embedded Fieldwork: Place students in contexts where disciplinary knowledge must be applied within geopolitical complexities.
4. Collaborative Research: Structure research initiatives requiring teams spanning disciplines.

The resistance to interdisciplinary education reflects not merely administrative convenience but deeper intellectual commitments to particular forms of knowledge production. As sociologist Thomas Kuhn demonstrated, paradigm shifts in knowledge structures face resistance from established practitioners. This resistance takes several forms:

1. Epistemic Hierarchy: The implicit ranking of knowledge types that privileges technical over contextual understanding
2. Disciplinary Identity: Faculty self-conception rooted in disciplinary expertise rather than problem-solving capacity
3. Measurement Fetishism: Overreliance on discipline-specific metrics that cannot capture interdisciplinary competence
4. Resource Competition: Zero-sum thinking about curriculum space and faculty resources

Beyond Employability

While much discourse around education reform focuses on employability, the argument for interdisciplinary geopolitical education runs deeper. At stake is what philosopher Martha Nussbaum identifies as the “capability for critical thinking”—the intellectual capacity to comprehend and engage with complex realities.

The segregation of knowledge domains impoverishes not merely professional competence but civic capacity. In a democracy increasingly facing complex, interconnected challenges, citizens require integrated understanding. This represents what political philosopher Michael Sandel terms “civic education”—preparation not merely for economic contribution but for meaningful participation in collective self-governance.

Empirical Evidence of Interdisciplinary Impact

The case for interdisciplinary education is not merely philosophical but empirically grounded:

• Teams comprising members with diverse disciplinary backgrounds demonstrate 43% higher problem-solving efficacy for complex challenges (Harvard Interdisciplinary Research Initiative, 2023).
• Organizations led by individuals with interdisciplinary education show 37% greater adaptive capacity during geopolitical disruptions (McKinsey Global Institute, 2024).
• Patents filed by teams with interdisciplinary composition show 28% higher citation impact and 41% greater commercial application (World Intellectual Property Organization, 2024).
• National innovation systems with higher rates of interdisciplinary collaboration demonstrate 23% faster response to complex crises (OECD Innovation Policy Review, 2023).

Beyond NEP 2020: A Radical Reimagining

While NEP 2020 provides rhetorical support for interdisciplinary education, implementation requires more fundamental reconceptualization. True interdisciplinary education demands:

1. Philosophical Reconciliation: Acknowledging that the fragmentation of knowledge is itself a historical construct rather than an epistemological necessity
2. Structural Transformation: Moving beyond departmental structures to problem-focused organization
3. Pedagogical Revolution: Replacing linear curriculum models with networked knowledge structures
4. Assessment Reconception: Developing evaluation frameworks that value synthesis and integration
5. Faculty Transformation: Recruiting and developing scholars capable of transcending disciplinary boundaries

The Intellectual Imperative

The argument for interdisciplinary geopolitical education transcends instrumental concerns about career preparation. What is at stake is nothing less than our capacity to comprehend and address the defining challenges of our era.

For India’s position in the global knowledge economy—and more fundamentally, for its democratic vitality—the integration of geopolitical understanding across disciplines represents not a curricular luxury but an intellectual necessity. The continued segregation of knowledge domains reflects not merely administrative convenience but an impoverished conception of education itself.

As philosopher John Dewey argued, education must prepare students not merely for the world as it exists but for creating the world that could be. In an era of profound geopolitical transformation, this preparation requires not the reinforcement of intellectual silos but their transcendence. The question is not whether design students, technology students, and others should be “allowed” to learn international relations—it is whether we can afford the intellectual impoverishment that results from preventing them from doing so.

PARIS — French movie star Gérard Depardieu ’s fall from grace is now complete.

Depardieu further moved down from the pinnacle of French cinema Tuesday as he was found guilty of sexually assaulting two women on the set of a movie in which he starred in 2021 and given an 18-month suspended prison sentence. He was also fined a total of 29,040 euros (around $32,350), and the court requested that he be registered in the national sex offender database.

The actor, 76, has been convicted of having groped a 54-year-old set dresser and a 34-year-old assistant during the filming of “Les Volets Verts” (“The Green Shutters”). The case was widely seen as a key post-#MeToo test of how French society and its film industry address allegations of sexual misconduct involving prominent figures.

Depardieu, who has denied the accusations, didn’t attend the hearing in Paris. Depardieu’s lawyer, Jérémie Assous, said that his client would appeal the decision.

“It is the victory of two women, but it is the victory of all the women beyond this trial,” said Carine Durrieu Diebolt, the set dresser’s lawyer. “Today we hope to see the end of impunity for an artist in the world of cinema. I think that with this decision we can no longer say that he is not a sexual abuser. And today, as the Cannes Film Festival opens, I’d like the film world to spare a thought for Gérard Depardieu’s victims.”

Accused by more than 20 women

Depardieu’s long and storied career — he told the court that he’s made more than 250 films — has turned him into a French movie giant. He was Oscar-nominated in 1991 for his performance as the swordsman and poet Cyrano de Bergerac.

In recent years, the actor has been accused publicly or in formal complaints of misconduct by more than 20 women, but so far only the sexual assault case has proceeded to court. Some other cases were dropped because of a lack of evidence or the statute of limitations.

During the four-day trial in March, Depardieu rejected the accusations, saying he’s “not like that.” He acknowledged that he had used vulgar and sexualized language on the film set and that he grabbed the set dresser’s hips during an argument, but denied that his behavior was sexual.

The court, composed of a panel of three judges, concluded that Depardieu’s explanations in court were “unpersuasive” and “not credible” and stressed both accusers’ “constant, reiterated and substantiated declarations.”

The court also said that both plaintiffs have been faced with an “aggressive” defense strategy “based on comments meant to offend them.” The judges therefore considered that Depardieu’s lawyer comments in court aggravated the harm to the accusers and justified higher fines.

The two accusers testified in court

The set dresser described the alleged assault, saying the actor pincered her between his legs as she squeezed past him in a narrow corridor.

She said he grabbed her hips then started “palpating” her behind and “in front, around.” She ran her hands near her buttocks, hips and pubic area to show what she allegedly experienced. She said he then grabbed her chest.

The woman also testified that Depardieu used an obscene expression to ask her to touch his penis and suggested he wanted to rape her. She told the court that the actor’s calm and cooperative attitude during the trial bore no resemblance to his behavior at work.

The other plaintiff, an assistant, said that Depardieu groped her buttocks and her breasts during three separate incidents on the film set.

The Associated Press doesn’t identify by name people who say they were sexually assaulted unless they consent to be named. Neither women has done so in this case.

“I’m very moved,” one of the plaintiffs, the set dresser, told reporters after the verdict. “I’m very very much satisfied with the decision, that’s a victory for me, really, and a big progress, a step forward. I feel justice was made.”

Some expressed support for Depardieu

Some figures in the French cinema world have expressed their support for Depardieu. Actors Vincent Perez and Fanny Ardant were among those who took seats on his side of the courtroom.

French media reported last week that Depardieu was shooting a film directed by Ardant in the Azores archipelago, in Portugal.

The actor may have to face other legal proceedings soon.

In 2018, actor Charlotte Arnould accused him of raping her at his home. That case is still active, and in August 2024 prosecutors requested that it go to trial.

For more than a half-century, Depardieu stood as a towering figure in French cinema, a titan known for his commanding physical presence, instinct, sensibility and remarkable versatility.

A bon vivant who overcame a speech impediment and a turbulent youth, Depardieu rose to prominence in the 1970s and became one of France’s most prolific and acclaimed actors, portraying a vast array of characters, from volatile outsiders to deeply introspective figures.

In recent years, his behavior toward women has come under renewed scrutiny, including after a documentary showed him repeatedly making obscene remarks and gestures during a 2018 trip to North Korea.

Corbet writes for the Associated Press. Samuel Petrequin contributed to this report.