
Congress MP Maintains Strategic Silence Amid Parliamentary Debate On Military Operation
The Thiruvananthapuram representative's calculated avoidance of media queries occurred as political circles eagerly anticipated the opposition party's approach during the crucial debate. Rather than providing substantive commentary, Tharoor consistently referenced the concept of voluntary silence, effectively sidestepping all inquiries about his involvement in the proceedings.
Internal party sources have indicated that Tharoor will likely abstain from the parliamentary discussion entirely. According to established procedures, members of Parliament must formally submit speaking requests to the Congress Parliamentary Party office, a step Tharoor has reportedly not undertaken. Party insiders suggest this omission reflects his reluctance to participate in the debate framework.
The situation has deeper roots in Tharoor's ideological divergence from his party's official position. Sources within the party hierarchy revealed that both the Leader of Opposition's office and the deputy leadership approached Tharoor to contribute to the Operation Sindoor discussion. However, he declined these overtures, explicitly stating his inability to align with the party's critical assessment of the government's military response.
Tharoor reportedly maintained his consistent position that Operation Sindoor represented a successful governmental action, expressing his intention to continue supporting this evaluation regardless of party expectations. He allegedly informed party leadership that any public statements would remain consistent with his previously articulated views on the matter.
When party officials clarified expectations that speakers must adhere to the Congress party's critical stance toward the government, Tharoor chose complete withdrawal from the debate rather than compromise his stated principles. He characterized this decision as maintaining ideological integrity despite organizational pressure.
The Congress party has finalized its speaker lineup with Gaurav Gogoi designated to initiate Monday's discussion, followed by contributions from Priyanka Gandhi Vadra, Deependra Hooda, Praneeti Shinde, Saptagiri Ulaka, and Bijendra Ola. Opposition Leader Rahul Gandhi is scheduled to deliver his remarks during Tuesday's session.
Tharoor's conspicuous absence from the speaker roster reflects his increasingly strained relationship with party leadership over recent months. The tension stems from his participation in a government-organized international delegation addressing the India-Pakistan conflict, an action perceived as contradicting established Congress positions.
His public endorsement of governmental policies and support for the temporary cessation of hostilities created significant friction with party colleagues who maintain critical perspectives toward the administration's approach. This ideological disagreement has positioned Tharoor at odds with mainstream party sentiment.
The parliamentary discussion represents the culmination of negotiations between government and opposition parties, resulting in an agreed 16-hour debate format spanning both legislative chambers. The focus centers on governmental responses to the April 22 Pahalgam terror incident, which resulted in 26 civilian fatalities and numerous injuries.
Opposition leadership, particularly Rahul Gandhi and allied party leaders, has consistently challenged the administration over alleged intelligence deficiencies surrounding the attack. They have also questioned claims by US President Donald Trump regarding American mediation efforts between India and Pakistan, assertions that the Indian government has categorically rejected.
The broader political context encompasses ongoing tensions regarding national security policies, diplomatic strategies, and the appropriate governmental response to cross-border terrorism. Tharoor's position represents a significant departure from traditional opposition unity, highlighting internal disagreements within the Congress party regarding foreign policy and security matters.
This development underscores the complex dynamics within opposition politics, where individual conscience and party discipline intersect with national security considerations and public accountability measures.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Time of India
29 minutes ago
- Time of India
India actively discussing trade pact with US, say minister
India is actively involved in the discussions with the US on the proposed bilateral trade agreement (BTA) with an aim to expand trade and investment, Parliament was informed on Tuesday. In a written reply to the Lok Sabha, Minister of State for Commerce and Industry Jitin Prasada said India-US bilateral trade agreement negotiations were launched in March 2025. Productivity Tool Zero to Hero in Microsoft Excel: Complete Excel guide By Metla Sudha Sekhar View Program Finance Introduction to Technical Analysis & Candlestick Theory By Dinesh Nagpal View Program Finance Financial Literacy i e Lets Crack the Billionaire Code By CA Rahul Gupta View Program Digital Marketing Digital Marketing Masterclass by Neil Patel By Neil Patel View Program Finance Technical Analysis Demystified- A Complete Guide to Trading By Kunal Patel View Program Productivity Tool Excel Essentials to Expert: Your Complete Guide By Study at home View Program Artificial Intelligence AI For Business Professionals Batch 2 By Ansh Mehra View Program Five rounds of negotiations have been held, the last being from July 14-18th, 2025, at Washington, he said. The US team is visiting India from August 25 to hold the next round of trade talks. "To safeguard the interests of farmers and the domestic industry, international trade negotiations allow for the inclusion of sensitive, negative, or exclusion lists -- categories of goods on which limited or no tariff concessions are granted," he said. Live Events In addition, in case of surge in imports and injury to the domestic industry, a country is allowed to take recourse to trade remedial measures such as anti-dumping and safeguards on imports. During 2021-25, the US was India's largest trading partner. The US accounts for about 18 per cent of India's total goods exports, 6.22 per cent in imports, and 10.73 per cent in bilateral trade. With America, India had a trade surplus (the difference between imports and exports) of USD 35.32 billion in goods in 2023-24. It was USD 41 billion in 2024-25 and USD 27.7 billion in 2022-23. In 2024-25, bilateral trade between India and the US reached USD 186 billion. India exported USD 86.5 billion in goods while importing USD 45.3 billion. In a separate reply, he said the US did not accept India's request for consultations under an agreement of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) concerning American tariffs on steel, aluminium, and related derivative products, Parliament was informed on Tuesday. The US has maintained that these measures were introduced on the grounds of national security, Prasada said in a written reply to the Lok Sabha. India, however, considers these measures to be safeguard actions that should have been notified and subjected to consultations under the WTO's Agreement on Safeguards (AoS). "India has accordingly reserved its right to suspend substantially equivalent concessions (right to impose equal trade measures in response) due to the US's non-compliance with its obligations under the AoS," he said. In another reply, the minister said India has not taken any decision to suspend or restrict trade or tourism activities with Turkey and Azerbaijan. However, the import from Turkey has declined from USD 3.78 billion in 2023-24 to USD 2.99 billion in 2024-25. The major items imported from Turkey during 2024-25 include Petroleum Crude, Gold, Inorganic Chemicals, Granite, Natural Stones and Aircraft & Spacecraft parts. The major items of import from Azerbaijan during 2024-25 include Finished Leather, Medical and Scientific Instruments, Raw Hides and Skins, Fruits/Vegetables Seeds and Hand Tools, Cutting Tools of Metals.


Hindustan Times
41 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
For Pakistan & US, it is back to doing business
There is a discernible sense of satisfaction within Pakistan's strategic fraternity at the undeniable uptick in the US-Pakistan interface over the past few months. Some may dispute the extent, but given how the relationship had eroded in the past decade-and-a-half, any improvement represents a big change. Given the transactional nature that dominates the US, there is the temptation to find direct factors for the upswing in US-Pakistan relations. (AP) The principal milestones of the US-Pakistan downturn are well known. For Pakistan, the US detection and killing of Osama bin Laden in 2011 in Abbottabad was a betrayal and a public humiliation. For many Pakistanis, that the US acted clandestinely deep inside Pakistan superseded the enormity of the fact that Osama had been living there all the time under the very noses of the Pakistan military. The free fall continued with mounting US frustrations over Pakistan's double game in Afghanistan. President Trump's 2018 New Year Day tweet exemplified this view. The tweet underlined US foolishness in giving Pakistan billions of dollars in aid in return for deceit and lies! This was consistent with emergent US narratives about Pakistan, but that it was from the President himself made it doubly significant. Through the Biden tenure matters crystallised at a low plateau of bad blood and mutual recriminations. The US's final withdrawal from Afghanistan in August 2021 in disorder and disarray added another layer to the deep strategic mistrust and suspicion that now characterised the relationship. President Biden did not have even a telecon with Imran Khan during the time he was PM and Imran Khan in turn blamed the US for his premature ouster from power. In the meantime, most US military and security assistance was suspended. What perhaps hurt Pakistan the most was the impact this had on training programmes for Pakistan military officers in the US. All this happened also when the India-US relationship seemed effortlessly to go from strength to strength. This further highlighted the distance between Washington and Islamabad. The past few months appear quite different. The change was animated quite dramatically by Field Marshal Asim Munir being hosted by President Trump in June 2025 in the immediate aftermath of Operation Sindoor. It is most unusual — perhaps even unprecedented — for a US president to host a chief of a foreign military who is not a head of State or government. This shift also coincides with new ambiguities in the US-India interface — perhaps triggered by President Trump's constant reiteration of having prevented further escalation in the India-Pakistan conflict during Operation Sindoor. To many in Pakistan, this has 'internationalised' Kashmir and highlighted the importance of third-party intervention as equally that even the US was skeptical about India's claims and demands. There had been earlier indicators of change beginning with President Trump's acknowledgement of Pakistan's counter-terrorism assistance in his State of the Union Address in March 2025. The allocation of a significant financial package as assistance to Pakistan for maintaining its F16 aircraft despite an otherwise stringent foreign aid cutback, was another. Alongside, more even-handed references to the India-Pakistan dynamic, meetings and telephone conversations between the US secretary of State and senior Pakistan leaders further underlined this shift. The announcement of a US-Pakistan Trade Agreement, albeit with a 19% tariff on imports from Pakistan, and Trump's enthusiastic references to hydrocarbon exploration and investment, are but the latest in this trend. The trade agreement may not be the best deal Pakistan could have got, but it is not as bad as could have been, and in any case some deal was better than no deal as far as the government of Pakistan was concerned. It may well be argued that there is nothing particularly significant in these transitions, but for most Pakistanis they suggest a return of their country to the US's radar after a long period of being out in the cold. What explains this shift? Given the transactional frame of mind that dominates the US, there is always the temptation to look for a direct and material factor. Numerous reasons are, therefore, assigned for this shift in US policy. Pakistan's counter-terrorism potential and the assistance it can offer is one. That the US is keen to have some relationship with Pakistan given the growing spread of China in the region is another. There is also the view that recommendations of the US Central Command on Pakistan's military potential vis-à-vis Iran in terms of its geographical location and the value of its air bases may have registered on the Presidency amid the current situation in West and South West Asia. Some argue that this shift in policy was also pushed along by crypto currency deals, and by US interest in potential Pakistani reserves of rare earth minerals. Each of these explanations may have some merit but perhaps the weight of any or all of these should not be exaggerated. Instead, it is useful to refocus on some basics. Pakistan is the fifth largest country in the world in terms of population with some 250 million people. It is riven by instability. It has nuclear weapons. It is situated in a sensitive geo-political location, almost in a global fault line. Given these attributes it was always only a matter of time that the long downturn in US Pakistan relations would reverse and US interest in Pakistan would reignite. We are at that stage now. All major powers decide on policies based on an appreciation of their own interests and their own understandings of evolving situations. To think that the long downturn in US Pakistan relations would have simply continued or that the US would see developments from our perspective alone is, and never was, a realistic assessment. We should take this shift in our stride. If some in India feel betrayed or dismayed at this turn of events, they have only themselves to blame. TCA Raghavan is a former Indian high commissioner to Pakistan. The views expressed are personal.


Scroll.in
41 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
Assam to drop foreigners tribunal cases against non-Muslims who entered state before 2015, cites CAA
The Assam Government has asked district authorities and members of the foreigners tribunals to drop cases against members of six communities – Hindu, Christian, Sikh, Buddhist, Jain and Parsi – who entered the state on or before December 31, 2014, citing the Citizenship Amendment Act. The state's home and political department held a meeting on July 17 and had discussed 'issues related to Foreigners Tribunal with reference to Citizenship Amendment Act' and the 'dropping off cases'. The meeting was held following a directive from Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma. The Citizenship Amendment Act is aimed to provide a fast track to citizenship to refugees from six minority religious communities, except Muslims, from Bangladesh, Afghanistan and Pakistan, on the condition that they have lived in India for six years and have entered the country by December 31, 2014. It was passed by Parliament in December 2019. The Union government notified the rules under the Act in March 2024. The foreigners tribunals in Assam are quasi-judicial bodies that adjudicate on matters of citizenship based on lineage and a 1971 cut-off date. They rely primarily on documents submitted by persons to establish their family's residency in Assam or India before 1971. The tribunals have been accused of arbitrariness and bias, and declaring people foreigners on the basis of minor spelling mistakes, a lack of documents or lapses in memory. Of the 1.6 lakh persons declared foreigners so far, more than 69,500 are Hindus. The department, under which the border police and the foreigners tribunals function, directed district commissioners, police chiefs and members of the tribunals to submit an action taken report in the matter. 'As per the amendments made to the Citizenship Act, the FTs are not supposed to pursue cases of foreigners belonging to the six specified communities (Hindu, Christian, Buddhist, Sikh, Parsi and Jain communities) who had entered into Assam on or prior to 31.12.2014,' showed the minutes of the meeting signed by Ajay Tiwari, the additional chief secretary, home and political department. Scroll has seen the document. 'It was suggested to drop all such cases,' the minutes added. It added: 'In this regard, the district commissioner and the senior SPs [superintendent of police] should immediately convene a meeting with their respective FT members and also review the developments periodically and submit the action taken report to this department.' The notification sent to district authorities said that 'foreigners should be encouraged and supported' for applying for Indian citizenship as per provisions of the Citizenship Amendment Act. It also noted that the Assam government had issued 'clear cut' instructions for withdrawal of all cases filed against persons belonging to the Gorkha and Koch-Rajbongshi communities. 'This should be complied with forthwith,' the government said. In July 2024, the Assam government had asked the state's border police not to forward cases of non-Muslims who had entered India illegally before 2014 to foreigners tribunals. The border police, which investigates citizenship cases, was told by the Assam home department at the time that the undocumented immigrants from the six communities should 'be advised' instead to apply for citizenship on the Citizenship Amendment Act portal, and that their cases would be decided by the Union government. Sarma had said at the time that existing cases would not be dropped. Critics contend that the Citizenship Amendment Act undermines the 1985 Assam Accord between the Union government and the leaders of the Assam Movement, which was launched in 1979 to identify and deport undocumented immigrants. The accord stipulates that anyone who entered Assam after the midnight of March 24, 1971, be identified and deported. Assamese nationalist view 'illegal migrants', irrespective of their religion, as a threat to the state's culture and resources. The Citizenship Amendment Act had sparked massive protests in Assam and several other parts of the country in 2019 and 2020. However, the amended law was welcomed by Assam's Bengali Hindus. In August 2019, Assam published a National Register of Citizens with the aim of separating Indian citizens from undocumented immigrants living in the state. More than 19 lakh persons, or 5.7% of the applicants, were left out of the final list. In March 2024, Sarma said five lakh Bengali Hindus, two lakh Assamese Hindu groups Koch-Rajbongshi, Das, Kalita and Sarma (Assamese), and 1.5 lakh Gorkhas had been left out of the National Register of Citizens. The chief minister had also said that seven lakh Muslims are among the 19 lakh persons excluded from the register. The ruling Bharatiya Janata Party had claimed that Hindus excluded from the register in Assam would be able to gain citizenship under the amended law. There have been fears that Muslims would be the only ones who stand to lose their citizenship in such an exercise.