What’s wrong with Indian National Congress?

The Congress Party’s Contradictory Stance on National Security: A Case Study in Political Confusion

In any mature democracy, opposition parties play a critical role in questioning the government, offering alternative policies, and ensuring transparency. However, when political criticism begins to echo the narratives of hostile nations or weaken national morale during times of crisis, it raises serious questions about the priorities of those in opposition. The Congress party’s handling of national security issues in recent years presents a troubling pattern—one that appears more focused on targeting Prime Minister Narendra Modi than standing united with India during external threats.

The Rafale Controversy: Politics Over National Interest

The Congress party launched a high-pitched campaign against the Rafale fighter jet deal in the run-up to the 2019 Lok Sabha elections. Rahul Gandhi repeatedly alleged corruption, claiming Modi had favored a private company over state-run HAL (Hindustan Aeronautics Limited). The Supreme Court, however, found no evidence of wrongdoing and gave a clean chit to the government. Moreover, the CAG (Comptroller and Auditor General) report confirmed that the deal under Modi was more cost-effective than what was being negotiated earlier.

Ironically, the Congress-led UPA government had itself delayed the purchase of these jets for years despite the Indian Air Force’s urgent requirement. In effect, Congress turned a vital national security acquisition into a political football, all while India faced rising threats from both Pakistan and China.

Politicizing HAL and Misleading Workers

Congress didn’t stop at Rafale. It attempted to stoke resentment within HAL by claiming the PSU was being “sidelined.” This was misleading because HAL was never assigned the role of manufacturing the Rafale under the new agreement with France. Instead of focusing on equipping India with the best military technology, Congress tried to mobilize labour unions to create unrest—yet another example where short-term political gains were prioritized over strategic clarity.

Mocking Indigenous Defence Technologies

Another pattern that emerged was Congress’s repeated mocking of India’s indigenous defence capabilities, including drones and missile systems. Instead of appreciating India’s steps toward self-reliance under the “Aatmanirbhar Bharat” initiative, Congress leaders often took jibes at these advancements.

Such behaviour not only undermines India’s efforts at reducing defence dependence on foreign powers, but also demoralizes scientists, engineers, and armed forces personnel working on indigenous defence projects. In the name of criticizing the government, the Congress often ends up mocking the nation’s strategic aspirations.

Pulwama and Balakot: Questioning the Army

The Pulwama terror attack in February 2019 was one of the deadliest assaults on Indian security forces. The Modi government responded with the Balakot airstrikes that targeted terror camps deep inside Pakistan. While the nation stood united, many Congress leaders sowed doubt about the success of the operation. Some even mocked the airstrikes, asking for “proof” of casualties.

Senior Congress leaders like Digvijaya Singh called the Balakot strike “fake,” and others alleged it was a political stunt. By doing so, they not only insulted the Indian Air Force but also echoed the exact narrative Pakistan was trying to push internationally—that “nothing happened.”

This wasn’t healthy scepticism; this was an attack on national morale at a time of war-like tension. In democracies, opposition should question, yes—but not during active defence operations.

Operation Sindoor and the Hypocrisy of De-escalation

In 2025, after a series of escalations at the LoC, India responded strongly through Operation Sindoor, which reportedly inflicted major damage on terrorist infrastructure. Initially, Congress leaders demanded peace and de-escalation, fearing war. But when Prime Minister Modi de-escalated the situation diplomatically to avoid full-scale conflict, the same Congress party claimed “Modi jhukh gaya” (Modi bowed down).

This contradictory behaviour reveals a deeper issue: Congress seems to adopt whatever narrative suits its agenda—first calling for peace, then blaming the government for pursuing it. If Modi retaliates, they accuse him of warmongering. If he shows restraint, they call him weak. This political flip-flopping during matters of national security confuses the public and weakens India’s strategic posture.

A Pattern of Undermining National Unity

If one observes closely, a disturbing trend emerges:

  • 2016 Surgical Strikes: Congress asked for video proof and doubted their success.
  • 2019 Balakot Airstrikes: Congress said “no one died” and called it “election gimmickry.”
  • Defence procurements: Whether it’s Rafale, S-400, Akash missiles, or indigenous drones, Congress often mocks rather than encourages progress.
  • International diplomacy: When India stands up to China or Pakistan, Congress either remains silent or blames India for escalation.

This consistent doubt, ridicule, and undermining of national efforts have created an impression that the Congress leadership is out of sync with national sentiment—especially on issues related to national security.

Why It Matters

In a time when India faces threats from Pakistan-sponsored terrorism, Chinese aggression, and hybrid warfare involving cyber and economic fronts, national unity becomes crucial. Political parties must draw a line between legitimate criticism and actions that can embolden enemies.

The Congress party, unfortunately, appears to have blurred that line repeatedly. Whether out of political desperation, leadership vacuum, or ideological confusion, its actions suggest a willingness to compromise India’s global standing and internal morale for the sake of opposing Modi.

This behaviour not only damages Congress’s credibility but also poses risks to India’s diplomatic and defence initiatives. The nation cannot afford such political immaturity at the cost of its strategic interests.

Conclusion: Opposition Must Be Responsible, Not Reckless

Criticism is essential in a democracy—but it must be responsible, fact-based, and timed with wisdom. Opposition parties should act as watchdogs, not saboteurs. The Congress party’s record on defence and national security issues since 2016 shows a pattern of contradiction, politicization, and recklessness that has hurt not just its own political standing but also national morale.

Until Congress reforms its approach and adopts a mature, nation-first posture in security matters, it will continue to lose the trust of the very people it hopes to represent.

Comments are closed.