Thiruvananthapuram, Jan 24: Senior Congress leader and Thiruvananthapuram MP Shashi Tharoor on Saturday said there was no change in the stand he had taken on “Operation Sindoor” and that he had no regrets about expressing a principled difference of opinion, firmly rejecting suggestions that he had acted against the party line in Parliament.
Speaking at the Kerala Literature Festival (KLF) in Kozhikode, Tharoor said that throughout his parliamentary career, he had never taken a position contrary to the official stand of the Congress.
He clarified, however, that the only instance of a principled disagreement was in the context of Operation Sindoor, which he described as a matter of national security rather than partisan politics. Tharoor’s remarks came amid speculation about differences between him and the party leadership, particularly following his absence from a key Congress meeting in Delhi.
Addressing the broader narrative, he underlined that matters of national security must be approached with clarity, responsibility, and a sense of national interest. Referring to a column he had written in the aftermath of the Pahalgam terror attack, Tharoor reiterated that such attacks must not go unpunished and that India was entitled to respond firmly.
At the same time, he cautioned against being drawn into a prolonged conflict with Pakistan. India, he said, should remain focused on development and avoid long-term military entanglements, advocating instead for limited and targeted military action against terror camps.
Noting that the government later adopted a similar approach, Tharoor said this validated the core argument he had made. Quoting Jawaharlal Nehru’s question — “If India dies, who will live?” — he stressed that when the country’s security and its standing in the international arena are at stake, national interest must take precedence over all other considerations.
Tharoor also declined to comment on controversies surrounding his absence from the Delhi meeting, making it clear that party matters would not be discussed in public forums. “This is a literary festival, not a platform for political declarations,” he said, adding that any concerns would be raised directly with the party leadership in the appropriate forum.
He acknowledged media speculation surrounding his absence, observing that some reports might be accurate while others were not. However, he reiterated that he had informed the leadership in advance and would not offer a public explanation, drawing a clear line between internal party matters and public discourse.
IANS
