logo
Rahul Gandhi Or Shashi Tharoor: Will The Real Congress Please Stand Up?

Rahul Gandhi Or Shashi Tharoor: Will The Real Congress Please Stand Up?

News182 days ago

Last Updated:
While Rahul Gandhi continues to undermine the government, Shashi Tharoor has led India's most fierce and sophisticated global PR campaign to counter Pakistan's narrative.
PM Narendra Modi may not yet have succeeded in breaking Balochistan away from Pakistan or getting back Pakistan Occupied Jammu and Kashmir, but he has split the Congress down the middle.
The recent decision by the Centre to send high-profile, all-party teams to 32 countries as well as the European Union has deepened fault lines in the Congress so much that the rifts are now in the open.
Rahul Gandhi has predictably gone against the patriotic narrative and the tradition of the Opposition standing with the government of the day in the time of a national security crisis. He is talking Pakistan's language, questioning Indian defence forces about the number of planes Pakistan has shot down. He has mocked and attacked S Jaishankar for damaging India's war efforts by informing Pakistan about an attack although facts make it amply clear that India's foreign minister did no such thing.
But this is not new for Rahul Gandhi. He has consistently spoken in China and Pakistan's voice after India's surgical strikes or skirmishes with the PLA. He secretly met Chinese officials while India was engaged in the Doklam conflict with China. He has been seen and accused of meeting Khalistanis, those close to the Muslim Brotherhood (like US congresswoman Ilhan Omar), entities believed to be working for the US Deep State and western globalists, particularly on his overseas trips.
Currently, he is leading the 'Narender-Surrender' campaign against Modi, implying that India lost the conflict with Pakistan, regardless of the extensive and precise airstrikes on Pakistan's terror camps and air bases which ultimately prompted Pakistan to beg for a ceasefire.
In the time of strife, Rahul Gandhi has undermined India's elected government and its stellar security forces more than most Pakistani politicians have.
In contrast, senior Congress leader Shashi Tharoor has led India's most fierce and sophisticated global PR campaign to counter Pakistan's narrative. Tharoor, who would spiritedly debate Sangh Parivar's worldview of the Bharatiya civilisation, nature of being Hindu, and the idea of India, has for the last few weeks been the foremost voice of patriotism in the Congress and to the world. He has been a vocal and articulate endorser and ambassador of India's actions in Operation Sindoor.
Salman Khurshid and Manish Tewari have similarly championed and amplified the Indian government's offensive after the Pahalgam attack. They have spoken in one voice with the nation.
Then there is Jairam Ramesh. He has a different stand and has criticised the government for not being able to eliminate the Pahalgam terrorists so far. But Rahul has lately attacked Ramesh acerbically, even hinting that he could be doing the BJP's bidding.
Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge has curiously been an example of speaking in two voices, perhaps one that of his own self and one of his master's. Presiding over a meeting of the Congress Working Committee (CWC) on May 7, he said India had given a befitting reply to Pakistan.
'We are proud of the Indian Armed Forces, who have given a befitting reply by taking bold and decisive action against the terror camps of Pakistan and PoK under 'Operation Sindoor'. We salute the courage, determination and patriotism of our brave soldiers," Kharge had said.
But the same Kharge, perhaps after chastisement from the proverbial Congress 'high command', later accused the Modi government of misleading the nation and demanded a special session of Parliament.
So, who is the real Congress?
Is the party torn between retaining a semblance of its patriotic past and legacy of the freedom struggle or has it become a radical, far-Left NGO bent on spreading hate, self-doubt, and chaos?
In that case, it should ask itself: who is it ultimately serving and why must it exist?
Abhijit Majumder is a senior journalist. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18's views.
First Published:
June 05, 2025, 13:15 IST

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Technology must aid, not replace, human mind in judicial decision: CJI
Technology must aid, not replace, human mind in judicial decision: CJI

Business Standard

time32 minutes ago

  • Business Standard

Technology must aid, not replace, human mind in judicial decision: CJI

Technology must complement, not replace, the human mind in judicial decision-making, Chief Justice of India BR Gavai has said while emphasising that the value of discretion, empathy and judicial interpretation is irreplaceable. In his keynote address on "Role of Technology in the Indian Legal System" at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) of the University of London, the CJI said while the judiciary welcomes innovations like automated cause lists, digital kiosks and virtual assistants, it must ensure that human oversight, ethical guidelines and robust training are integral to their implementation. "The value of discretion, empathy and judicial interpretation is irreplaceable," Justice Gavai said and pointed out that the Indian judiciary is well-positioned to develop homegrown ethical frameworks tailored to the country's constitutional and societal realities. "We possess the technological expertise, the judicial foresight and the democratic mandate to build systems that reflect our values of equality, dignity and justice," he said. "In fact, in the very first week after assuming office as the chief justice of India, I initiated a discussion with the Centre for Research and Planning of the Supreme Court to prepare a comprehensive note on the ethical use of artificial intelligence and emerging technologies in the judiciary. "Technology must complement, not replace, the human mind in judicial decision-making," the CJI said, adding, "The emphasis must always be on using technology to enhance trust and transparency -- never to replace the human conscience at the heart of justice." He said though the judiciary has started to embrace technology, with the emergence of artificial-intelligence (AI) tools in judicial processes -- from case management to legal research, document translation and even predictive analytics -- there must be caution. "Around the world, debates are ongoing about the ethical use of AI in legal systems. Concerns include algorithmic bias, misinformation, data manipulation and breaches of confidentiality. For instance, sensitive information, such as the identity of a victim of crime, must never be disclosed due to AI error or the absence of clear protocols. Additionally, a few recent cases have shown that AI tools can generate fabricated citations or biased suggestions if not properly regulated and monitored," the CJI underscored. He added that technology, if anchored in constitutionalism and empathy, can transform access to justice from an abstract ideal into a lived and shared reality. "As we continue our journey toward modernising the Indian legal system, our approach must remain deeply rooted in constitutional values. The integration of technology must be people-centric, inclusive and guided by ethical clarity. Our ultimate goal should be to make justice accessible to every citizen, regardless of language, geography, income or digital literacy," he said. Concluding his address, Justice Gavai said, "I firmly believe that access to justice is not solely the responsibility of the judiciary. It is a shared national commitment. Law schools, civil society, legal-aid institutions and governments must work in unison to develop and promote technological models that are accessible, transparent and inclusive." Meanwhile, at a joint event of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) and Trilegal organised on the occasion of London International Disputes Week, CJI Gavai said in recent decades, the justice-delivery mechanism, once confined within the boundaries of courtrooms, has witnessed a significant shift towards modes of alternative dispute resolution, with arbitration emerging as a prominent pillar of that transformation. The CJI was speaking on the topic of "Navigating the evolving landscape: The impact of the 7th edition of the SIAC Rules on India-Related Arbitrations". "At the cusp of this evolution lies the recognition that justice, particularly in complex commercial disputes, need not be adversarial or bureaucratic. Rather, it must be confidential, expert-driven and above all, tailored to the needs of those who seek it. Arbitration, in this context, is a substantive recalibration of how we understand and deliver justice," he said. Justice Gavai pointed out that over the last 10-15 years, India has made a multi-pronged effort towards its aspiration of building a favourable and sought-after place for arbitration. "While legislative reforms have significantly strengthened India's arbitration framework, the judiciary has also played a proactive role in fostering a more arbitration-friendly environment. Various progressive judgments by the Supreme Court of India over the last few years stand testament to this. Nonetheless, the enormity of India as a country has ensured that certain on-ground challenges continue," he said. "The Indian judiciary has and will continue to recognise and respect the autonomy of the arbitral process, ensuring that the courts step in only when demanded by the needs of justice," he added. The CJI said, "In conclusion, I am happy to note that the 7th edition of the SIAC Rules is a forward-looking endeavour, aimed at enhancing efficiency while balancing fairness. For India, whose commercial players are increasingly global in outlook and operation, these rules offer both an opportunity and a challenge -- the opportunity to align with international best practices and the challenge to elevate our own standards while balancing them with India's practical realities.

Congress leader Rajesh Soni arrested for Facebook posts on Operation Sindoor, booked under new BNS law
Congress leader Rajesh Soni arrested for Facebook posts on Operation Sindoor, booked under new BNS law

Economic Times

time34 minutes ago

  • Economic Times

Congress leader Rajesh Soni arrested for Facebook posts on Operation Sindoor, booked under new BNS law

Rajesh Soni, general secretary of Gujarat Congress, was arrested for Facebook posts allegedly undermining India's military morale during Operation Sindoor. The posts featured Prime Minister Modi in a pilot's uniform and claimed the government had surrendered, prompting charges under newly enacted Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) laws. The police argue the content risked India's sovereignty and soldier morale. Congress leaders strongly opposed the arrest, stating Soni intended to highlight the need for proper recognition of soldiers, not criticise their efforts. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads What the police say sparked the arrest Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads What the charges actually mean Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Rajesh Soni, a senior Congress leader in Gujarat, was arrested early Friday by the state's Cyber Crime Cell over a pair of Facebook posts that police allege endangered national morale and spread misinformation about a major military posts were related to Operation Sindoor, an ongoing mission by the Indian armed forces targeting terror camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (PoK). Soni now faces charges under two sections of the recently enacted Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)—sections 152 and 353(1)(a).The FIR, filed by the CID Cyber Crime team on Thursday, cited two Facebook posts made by of them depicted Prime Minister Narendra Modi wearing a fighter pilot uniform in a poster-like image. In another, Soni allegedly claimed that 'the Indian government surrendered during the operation,' an accusation the police say could undermine both the mission and the morale of troops deployed on the of Police (CID-Cyber Crime), Bharatsinh Tank, said, 'Soni was accused of breaking defence personnel's morale and putting India's sovereignty in danger through misleading posts on Facebook.'Tank went on to say, 'We arrested Soni for his posts which could break the armed forces' morale and send a wrong message to soldiers that their contribution and sacrifice on the battlefield will go in vain.'Soni has been charged under Section 152 of the BNS, which deals with acts that endanger the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India. This section carries serious consequences, including up to life imprisonment or a minimum of seven years' jail, plus a second charge—Section 353(1)(a)—relates to statements that could incite public mischief. This legal provision, too, has teeth and signals the government's intent to regulate what it views as provocative or destabilising online behaviour, especially during military arrest did not go unnoticed by Soni's party after news broke, several Congress leaders gathered at the CID's office in Gandhinagar in protest. Leading the charge was Gujarat Congress president Shaktisinh Gohil, who described the police action as disproportionate and politically said, 'He only tried to highlight that soldiers need to get their due credit instead of the govt spending taxpayers' money on publicity.'He also accused the authorities of cracking down on free expression at a time when the nation should be focusing on supporting its armed forces, not silencing Sindoor has become a national talking point in recent weeks. The Indian military launched the mission with the stated goal of eliminating terror infrastructure in Pakistani territory and PoK. It has been projected by the government as a demonstration of India's zero-tolerance policy towards cross-border the operation has also sparked debates over public narrative management. As the conflict plays out on the ground, its portrayal in digital spaces has become sensitive—especially with a politically charged environment and general elections in government's actions suggest it sees misinformation as a direct threat to the morale of soldiers and the success of such operations. At the same time, critics argue that there is a thin line between national interest and political convenience when it comes to controlling arrest under the new BNS framework could mark a pivotal moment in how India enforces online accountability. It raises difficult questions: Where does one draw the line between political critique and disinformation? Who decides whether a post is morale-breaking or simply provocative?For now, Rajesh Soni remains in custody, his party defiant, and the legal system gearing up for what may become a high-profile case on digital speech and national security.(With inputs from TOI)

Why Pakistan's Taliban Sanctions Panel Role At UNSC Is No Victory, Here's The Fine Print
Why Pakistan's Taliban Sanctions Panel Role At UNSC Is No Victory, Here's The Fine Print

News18

time41 minutes ago

  • News18

Why Pakistan's Taliban Sanctions Panel Role At UNSC Is No Victory, Here's The Fine Print

Last Updated: While Pakistan will chair the UNSC Taliban Sanctions Committee, it is no victory for Islamabad - due to its poor record on terrorism - as it received far less than what it wanted. While Pakistan is set to chair the Taliban Sanctions Committee of the UN Security Council in 2025, it failed to get what it wanted – to secure chairmanship of other UN Sanctions Committees – possibly due to its dismal record of keeping cross-border terrorism emanating from the country in check. Apart from chairing the UNSC Taliban Sanctions Committee, Pakistan will also be the vice-chair of the Counter-Terrorism Committee of the 15-nation UN body. According to a list of chairs of the subsidiary bodies of the UN Security Council, Denmark will chair the 1267 ISIL and Al-Qaida Sanctions Committee of the UN Security Council, while Russia and Sierra Leone will be vice-chairs for 2025. However, Pakistan has actually received far less than what it wanted, given the world's doubts on Islamabad's credibility. For the first time in the history of the UN Security Council, the Informal Working Group (IWG) on Sanctions will have two co-chairs. Pakistan will co-chair the documentation IWG with Denmark and the Sanctions IWG with Greece. What Did Pakistan Want? Pakistan had demanded the 1267 Sanctions Committee; 1540 (Non-Proliferation) Sanctions Committee; 1988 (Taliban) Committee and Chair of the 1373 Counter Terrorism Committee (CTC), but only got the Taliban Sanctions Committee, much less than what it had wanted. Pakistan is also co-chairing the 1373 CTC, which is not very substantial and is merely ceremonial in nature. India had chaired the 1373 CTC in 2011 and in the committees require consensus of members, so the current allocation is far below the expectations of Pakistani leadership. In reality, the allocation has dealt a heavy blow to Pakistan, as its allocation remains far below its expectations despite sending a delegation – led by Bilawal Bhutto – to the UN, possibly due to its poor track record on cross-border terrorism. Despite failing to curb terrorism on its soil, Pakistan showed an uncompromising and undeserving attitude that delayed a consensus from being formed by six months, which greatly annoyed other UNSC members. India's Diplomatic Outreach India, which co-chaired the Counter Terrorism Committee in 2022, has consistently reminded the international community that Pakistan is host to the world's largest number of UN-proscribed terrorists and entities, including notorious terrorist Osama bin Laden, who was found and eliminated by American forces in Pakistan in 2011. In a big blow to Pakistan, Russia and Guyana – both sharing cordial ties with India – are vice-chairs in the Taliban Sanctions Committee, which will prevent Pakistan from gaining a free hand. Pakistan is also co-chairing two IWGs with Denmark and Greece, who are also friends with India. This means that India can use its diplomatic might and close partnership with friends in the Council to prevent Pakistan from making any adverse steps. Notably, India had also chaired the same 1988 (Taliban) Sanctions Committee during its UNSC 2021-22 term along with the Chair of the 1970 Libya Sanctions Committee. First Published: June 07, 2025, 15:20 IST

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store