Rahul Gandhi's two recent speeches have stirred political waters once again, triggering strong reactions—some celebratory, others sharply critical. It’s not new. Each time he attempts to highlight a serious political issue, he often ends up complicating it by adding unnecessary provocations or framing them poorly. While it would be unfair to call him politically naive, it's also clear that some of these remarks are far from accidental. Many of them appear deliberate, driven by a desire to mirror the aggression he has experienced from his opponents.
There is now a growing class of staunch Rahul Gandhi supporters who believe India cannot survive politically without him. That blind devotion is dangerous—not just for the party, but for the broader opposition space. Rahul Gandhi appears intent on matching the BJP-RSS's combative tone, believing that a tit-for-tat strategy is the only way forward. But doing so risks alienating allies and muddying his own ideological claims.
Take his recent statement in Assam, where he declared that no one can save Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma from going to jail once Congress comes to power. While criticism of Sarma’s politics is valid, the language Gandhi chose does not distinguish him from the very political culture he claims to oppose. The Opposition Leader must rise above retributive politics. It is vital that Congress expose corruption and communalism within the BJP, but it must do so through argument and integrity—not by mimicking the rhetoric of vendetta.
Then came the Kerala comment—perhaps more revealing. Gandhi stated that he is fighting both the BJP and the CPI(M) ideologically. This line betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of Indian political complexities. Equating the Left with the BJP is intellectually dishonest and strategically self-defeating. Kerala has alternated power between the Congress-led UDF and the Left-led LDF, and in the last elections, Pinarayi Vijayan’s leadership was clearly validated by the people. While the Left faces two-term anti-incumbency, the Congress’s own performance has been dismal in the state.
Rahul Gandhi must reflect: if he continues to lump the CPI(M) with the BJP, how does he intend to build a credible opposition alliance? Congress risks isolating itself from its own past, including the legacy of Rajiv Gandhi, which, for better or worse, played a significant role in shaping today’s political currents. We all remember Rajiv Gandhi’s infamous anti-Mandal speech in Parliament, PV Narasimha Rao’s inaction during the Babri Masjid demolition, and the Congress’s consistent alignment with corporate power, from Rajiv Gandhi's era to UPA II, which greatly benefited figures like Ambani.
The Congress Party has historically treated allies as optional extras—embracing them when weak, ignoring them when strong. This inconsistency led to the departure of the Left from UPA, despite the CPI(M)’s crucial role in ensuring its smooth functioning. The problem wasn’t ideology—it was the Congress’s arrogance in power and its unwillingness to genuinely accommodate ideological partners.
Rahul Gandhi’s latest posturing will further complicate the party’s role in the INDIA bloc. As elections approach, Congress will face deep contradictions in states like Bihar, West Bengal, and Kerala. In Kerala, legitimate criticism of the Left is fair game. But painting the CPI(M) as morally equivalent to the BJP is politically reckless and factually absurd. Moreover, it weakens Congress’s own ideological standing—particularly when Rahul himself is accused of borrowing from Leftist positions.
His past should offer lessons. For instance, the UPA’s focus on MNREGA was welcome, but it came too late and failed to address deeper economic injustices. Land redistribution was ignored, and P. Chidambaram’s land acquisition model prioritized corporate interests over justice. By the time Congress attempted course correction, it had already lost political ground.
What Rahul Gandhi needs now is political maturity, not just moral indignation. His speeches must uphold a level of decency, even in critique. Political leaders must leave room for negotiation, especially in a fragmented democracy like ours. Equating ideological allies with ideological enemies closes the doors to strategic unity—and that is a luxury the opposition cannot afford.
Before I close, let me raise a question Rahul Gandhi has so far avoided: why has he remained silent on the demand by Buddhists across the world to hand over the Mahabodhi Temple to the Buddhist community? He visited Bodh Gaya, but offered no comment on this long-standing issue. Why not speak up for a cause that is simple, just, and non-controversial?
Likewise, the Congress has failed to take a clear position on the Gaza genocide. These are not fringe causes. If the party claims to stand for justice and human rights, its leaders must be bold enough to say so—openly and consistently. These issues shouldn’t be left only to civil society or non-political actors. The Congress must lead from the front.
Rahul Gandhi has often projected himself as a man of conviction. But conviction without clarity, strategy, and humility will only lead to further isolation. In politics, managing contradictions is the ultimate art. And if he wishes to lead a diverse opposition coalition, he must learn to practice it—not just preach it.
---
*Human rights defender
Comments