BRICS: When Politics Came Before the Nation
Total Views |
There is something larger than a dinner in the controversy over the BRICS summit. The three Congress chief ministers who stayed away from the dinner hosted by Prime Minister Narendra Modi may have believed they were making a political point. The BJP, naturally, saw it differently, accusing them of placing partisan politics above national interest. But the episode raises a question that Indian politics can no longer avoid - When does opposition to a government become opposition for opposition’s sake?
The BRICS summit was not a BJP programme. It was not a Modi family function. It was an international summit hosted by India. That distinction appears to have been lost.
Three Congress chief ministers Karnataka’s D.K. Shivakumar, Telangana’s Revanth Reddy and Kerala’s V.D. Satheesan were invited to the dinner but did not attend. Congress leaders have raised objections over the exclusion of party president Mallikarjun Kharge and Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi from the summit-related events. Some Congress leaders have also questioned what India has actually gained from BRICS.
These are legitimate political questions. An opposition party has every right to ask whether BRICS delivers tangible economic and strategic gains for India. P. Chidambaram has done precisely that. At the same time, Shashi Tharoor has taken a more positive view of India's diplomatic convening power. But criticism of BRICS and participation in a national diplomatic event are not mutually exclusive. That is where the Congress position becomes difficult to defend.
ALSO READ: Indians BRUTALLY grill Pakistanis for trolling President Murmu
The BJP has predictably converted the absence into a political attack. Its argument is blunt: political and ideological differences are legitimate, but there should be no discord when national interest is involved. BJP MP Bansuri Swaraj even asked whether opposition to Modi had now become opposition to India. The question may be politically loaded, but it deserves an answer.
India's foreign policy cannot become an extension of domestic partisan warfare. Governments change. Prime ministers change. Political parties rise and fall. But diplomatic relationships, strategic interests and India's standing in the world remain.
The Congress itself knows this history. Governments led by Congress built India's foreign-policy architecture over decades. The BJP may disagree with many aspects of that legacy, but it did not declare India's earlier diplomatic engagements to be the property of the Congress. The same principle must work in reverse.
There is another disturbing dimension. The BRICS dinner itself became entangled with the controversy over its vegetarian menu, with Congress leaders arguing that the government should recognise India's large non-vegetarian population. Rahul Gandhi joined the debate by highlighting the country's dietary preferences. What should have been a showcase of India's culinary diversity was pulled into the familiar domestic culture war.
This is not merely about food. It reflects a larger political habit - turning everything into a partisan battlefield.
If the Prime Minister inaugurates something, it becomes a Modi event. If India wins diplomatic recognition, the achievement is reduced to BJP propaganda. If India hosts a global summit, the Opposition looks for reasons to question it. And if the government succeeds, the immediate political instinct becomes to find the flaw. That is unhealthy for democracy.
Opposition is indispensable. But opposition is not permanent negation. A mature Opposition should be capable of saying - We disagree with the government, but we recognise the country's achievement.
The larger danger is that partisanship is beginning to swallow statesmanship.
India cannot aspire to become a major global power while treating every international achievement as an opportunity for domestic political point-scoring. Nor can national interest become a slogan used by the ruling party to silence criticism. The line must be clear.
Oppose the government when necessary. Question the Prime Minister when justified. Challenge foreign policy when you disagree. But do not confuse the people of India. That distinction is the minimum requirement of responsible opposition. The BRICS dinner may soon disappear from public memory. The political question it has exposed should not. Can Indian politics learn to distinguish between defeating a government and diminishing the nation?