After decades of being written about, judged, caricatured and criticised by others, Sonia Gandhi has chosen to narrate her own story. The considerable public interest in her memoir, along with the political reactions to its release, raises an important question: why does a woman's attempt to recount her own life become such a major political event?
Sonia Gandhi's memoir, Belonging: A Journey of Love, released in India on November 10, 2026, by HarperCollins, has already become the subject of a nationwide political debate. Reports of strong demand at bookstores and online platforms, along with its appearance at the top of Amazon India's bestseller list, indicate considerable public curiosity about the book.
For a country where political narratives are often shaped by competing parties, television debates and social media campaigns, a memoir offers an opportunity to hear an individual describe her experiences in her own words. This does not make the account immune to scrutiny, but it makes it worth reading before passing judgement.
Sonia Gandhi herself appeared to anticipate the controversy. In a video message ahead of the release, she remarked: “There’s bound to be some tamasha when this book comes out. After all, others have spent decades telling my ‘story’, now it’s my turn.”
Her observation captures an important aspect of the memoir. For decades, Sonia Gandhi has been among the most discussed and scrutinised figures in Indian politics. Her Italian origins, marriage into the Nehru-Gandhi family, political influence, decision to enter public life and association with successive Congress governments have all been subjects of intense public debate.
Public Image
She has been portrayed in contrasting ways: as a political strategist operating behind the scenes, an outsider who acquired considerable influence, a reluctant politician and, eventually, a leader who became the face of the Congress party. Much of her public image has been shaped by political opponents, supporters and media interpretations. Her memoir provides an opportunity to examine how she views her own journey.
A memoir, however, is neither a judicial verdict nor an independently verified historical account. It is an individual's recollection of events, shaped by personal experience, memory and perspective. Readers are entitled to question its claims, compare them with historical records and challenge its interpretations. But they should also be allowed to read the account before deciding what it represents.
The question is not whether Sonia Gandhi should be above criticism. She should not be. It is whether she should be denied the opportunity to narrate her own experiences.
The political reaction to Belonging has been swift, particularly from the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). BJP national spokesperson C.R. Kesavan suggested that the memoir should have been titled Whitewashing rather than Belonging, alleging that it attempts to soften the historical record of the Nehru-Gandhi family and the Congress party. BJP spokesperson Pradeep Bhandari questioned its references to the demolition of the Babri Masjid and raised the Bofors controversy and the 1984 anti-Sikh violence.
Other reactions went beyond criticism of the memoir's historical interpretations. Union Minister Giriraj Singh accused Sonia Gandhi of expressing grief selectively and alleged that her emotional responses were linked to electoral considerations. He also commented on her account of Prime Minister Narendra Modi allegedly looking away when they encountered each other. BJP MP Rahul Sinha reportedly dismissed the significance of the memoir, saying that her writings would make no difference and that nobody would read the book.
These are political responses rather than independent assessments of the memoir. They also demonstrate how quickly a personal account has become another point of confrontation between the BJP and the Congress.
Political opponents are entitled to scrutinise the memoirs of influential leaders. Indeed, they should. But there is a difference between challenging historical claims with evidence and reducing personal recollections to political slogans, taunts and dismissive remarks.
When a book is rejected before readers have had a reasonable opportunity to examine it, the debate risks becoming less about its contents and more about the political identity of its author.
Legitimate Response
Congress leaders, meanwhile, have criticised the BJP's response. Congress leader Salman Khurshid urged critics to read the book and understand its contents rather than immediately turning it into a controversy. He also recalled that BJP leaders Atal Bihari Vajpayee and L.K. Advani had expressed regret over the demolition of the Babri Masjid.
Congress MP Rajeev Shukla similarly accused the BJP of giving the memoir a political interpretation. He argued that Sonia Gandhi had recorded her thoughts and that her sentiments should be respected rather than automatically converted into a controversy.
There is a legitimate point in these responses. A memoir deserves to be examined as a memoir, even when its author is a political figure. This does not mean accepting every recollection as unquestionable truth. It means considering the account in its entirety rather than selecting a few politically convenient passages to support a predetermined position.
At the same time, Sonia Gandhi's memoir cannot be considered beyond scrutiny. Several contentious episodes in modern Indian history are connected to the political legacy of the family she married into. The 1975 Emergency, the 1984 anti-Sikh violence, the Bofors controversy and the demolition of the Babri Masjid are significant events that demand historical examination, accountability and public discussion.
According to Reuters, Sonia Gandhi describes the 1984 anti-Sikh violence as a “tragic and shameful chapter”, criticises officials who failed to prevent or stop the violence and acknowledges the delay in delivering justice. At the same time, she defends former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi against allegations of complicity. The BJP has questioned aspects of her account, particularly her description of the Army's deployment.
On the Emergency, Sonia Gandhi reportedly describes Indira Gandhi as increasingly isolated and politically cornered, suggesting that these circumstances contributed to the decision to continue it. Critics have questioned this interpretation, arguing that it tends to soften responsibility for the suspension of democratic freedoms.
These are among the passages that readers, historians and researchers should examine carefully. A political family cannot be insulated from questions about its record simply because one of its members has written a personal memoir. Equally, a memoir cannot be rejected merely because its author belongs to a political family whose legacy is contested. Historical accountability and the right to personal expression must coexist.
Another important dimension of the book is its title. Sonia Gandhi was born in Italy, grew up in Europe and came to India in 1968 after marrying Rajiv Gandhi. She entered a family that was already central to India's political history. Her subsequent life was shaped by personal tragedies, public scrutiny and, eventually, her entry into politics.
Her foreign origins became a recurring political issue, particularly when she emerged as an influential figure in the Congress party. Her opponents repeatedly questioned her birthplace and suitability for political leadership. However, belonging is not determined solely by birthplace. It is also shaped by relationships, personal choices, responsibilities and the place one comes to regard as home.
Complicated Journey
The memoir appears to explore this complicated journey of identity, love, loss, duty and belonging. Whether readers agree with Sonia Gandhi's political interpretations is a separate question from whether they can understand the personal experiences she seeks to recount. One can disagree with her politics and still acknowledge her right to narrate her experiences of living in India for nearly six decades.
The public response to the book is another aspect worth examining. According to Reuters, Belonging topped Amazon India's bestseller list on Wednesday, November 11, despite its price of Rs 1,299. This is notable for a 544-page English-language political memoir. The price may be beyond the reach of some readers, while the availability of the book only in English at the time of its release could limit its readership.
A Hindi edition and translations into other Indian languages would potentially make the memoir accessible to a much wider audience. The interest surrounding its publication also reflects public curiosity about the lives of people who have occupied positions of political power, particularly when their public images have been shaped by years of political controversy.
At a time when political communication is increasingly dominated by short videos, hashtags, television debates and social media exchanges, the willingness of readers to spend time and money on a lengthy book is worth noting. Some may want to understand what happened behind the headlines, while others may be interested in the personal experiences behind familiar political events. There may also be readers who simply want to compare the author's account with the narratives they have encountered over the years.
Whatever the motivation, reading the memoir provides a better starting point for discussion than making assumptions about its contents.
There is a broader democratic principle involved. Political leaders from different ideological backgrounds have written memoirs that have invited appreciation, criticism and historical scrutiny. Sonia Gandhi's Belonging should be treated in the same way.
Her account should neither be accepted as unquestionable truth nor subjected to a political trial before readers have examined it. If important episodes have been omitted, historians can point them out. If her recollections contradict established historical records, those contradictions should be documented. If her interpretations appear self-serving, they deserve scrutiny. The same standards should apply to memoirs written by leaders across the political spectrum.
A mature democracy encourages people to read accounts even when they disagree with their authors. Political understanding cannot develop if books are judged primarily by the identity of their writers rather than the substance of their arguments.
For decades, Sonia Gandhi's story has been narrated by political opponents, supporters and commentators. She has now chosen to present her own version. Readers should have the opportunity to examine it and form independent opinions. Agreement with her politics is not a prerequisite for reading her memoir. Its claims can be questioned, its interpretations debated and its omissions identified. But reading should come before ridicule.
---
Mohd. Ziyaullah Khan is a freelance content writer and editor based in Nagpur. He is also an activist and social entrepreneur and co-founder of TruthScape, a group of digital activists working to counter disinformation on social media
Comments