Opinion | When Truth Hurts: Congress’s Shashi Tharoor Dilemma Exposes Deeper Faultlines
Quick Facts:
- Shashi Tharoor praised India’s strong security stance abroad, triggering backlash from his own party.
- Congress leader Udit Raj called Tharoor a “super spokesperson of BJP.”
- BJP’s Shehzad Poonawalla hit back, questioning Congress’s loyalty to national interest.
- The episode reveals growing discomfort within the Congress over narratives that challenge its past.
A Congress Civil War in Public View
The Congress party appears to be unraveling in full public view—this time, over one of its most articulate MPs, Shashi Tharoor, who is being accused of ‘siding with the BJP’ for saying what most Indians quietly believe: that India has grown more assertive in dealing with terrorism under its recent leadership.
During his visit to Panama as part of a multi-party global outreach, Tharoor made a factual observation—India’s response to cross-border terrorism has evolved. But instead of engaging in a thoughtful conversation, Congress leader Udit Raj took to social media to hurl sarcasm and accusations at his own colleague. His jibe calling Tharoor the “super spokesperson of the BJP” not only underscores the Congress’s deepening insecurities but also exposes its growing disconnect from the idea of national consensus.
The Attack and Its Irony
Udit Raj’s X post read more like a political tantrum than a reasoned rebuttal. He invoked historical references—the 1965 and 1971 wars, UPA-era surgical strikes—to suggest that the Congress had always been tough on Pakistan. But in doing so, he missed the forest for the trees.
Tharoor never claimed that India was never assertive before Modi. His point, clearly, was about a shift in public messaging and perception—something the current dispensation has amplified and turned into a diplomatic tool.
Ironically, Raj's defensive outburst handed the BJP the perfect opportunity to question the Congress’s discomfort with any praise of India’s growing strategic clarity.
BJP’s Counteroffensive: More Than Just Politics
BJP spokesperson Shehzad Poonawalla didn’t hold back. He accused Congress of suffering “stomach pain” when India is praised on international platforms. In a fiery rebuttal, he argued, “If someone speaks for India, does that automatically mean he speaks for the BJP?”
He went further, suggesting that Rahul Gandhi may have personally directed Udit Raj to denounce Tharoor—a claim that might be speculative, but not entirely implausible in light of the party’s recent habit of stifling internal dissent.
This isn't merely a political skirmish—it’s a philosophical divide. Can someone within the Congress praise national policy without being branded a traitor to the party? If not, what does that say about the party’s ability to evolve with India's changing geopolitical realities?
National Interest or Party Ego?
There’s an uncomfortable question that must be asked: Why does the Congress feel threatened when India is shown in a position of strength on the global stage?
The answer may lie in a combination of political insecurity and a lingering colonial hangover that sees foreign validation as more legitimate than domestic resolve. Tharoor’s global popularity—especially among liberal and diaspora audiences—makes him both an asset and a threat within a party unsure of its ideological footing.
The irony is profound: A Congress leader speaks about India’s strong anti-terror stance abroad, and instead of Pakistan objecting, it’s his own party that erupts in outrage.
What History Should Teach Us
The BJP has also used this moment to remind the public of uncomfortable historical truths. Poonawalla referenced how former PM Rajiv Gandhi allegedly asked U.S. President Ronald Reagan to mediate in Kashmir. He brought up how Deputy PM Jagjivan Ram advised Indira Gandhi to reclaim PoK in 1971—a move that never happened. He questioned why India approached the United Nations in the first place over Kashmir.
Whether or not all these arguments hold water in contemporary policymaking, they do shine a light on the Congress’s legacy issues—decisions that continue to shape India’s challenges today.
If the party hopes to regain public trust, it cannot afford to silence voices like Tharoor’s, who present an evolved, internationally respected face of Indian politics.
The Bigger Picture: Unity in National Dialogue
What the Congress fails to grasp is that not every comment made by its leaders abroad needs to be filtered through the lens of partisan insecurity. In an era of rising global stakes—from China’s aggression to Pakistan’s misinformation campaigns—India needs a unified national voice, not a fractured opposition that self-destructs at the slightest difference of tone.
The public is no longer content with old war stories. They want coherent, strong, and forward-looking policies. If a Congress MP articulates that—even if it overlaps with the government’s stance—the party should embrace it, not condemn it.
Final Word
The real crisis within the Congress isn’t ideological—it's existential. The inability to celebrate its own members' statesmanship when it serves the nation reveals a party unsure of its identity and insecure about its future.
In a democracy, patriotism should never be held hostage to party lines. The Congress must decide: Will it champion national interest, or will it punish those within who dare to speak truth to relevance?
