Congress Aiyar, Tharoor face-off in open letter war

In an ‘open letter war’, Congress leader Mani Shankar Aiyar declared that he was parting ways with party colleague Shashi Tharoor, while the latter hit back at the veteran politician for his “many gratuitous” comments. It all started with Aiyar penning an open letter to Tharoor that was published in Frontline magazine earlier this week. Aiyar said he was shocked to the core by Tharoor’s answers to questions on a TV channel on March 6, on the ongoing “illegal and sinful war” on Iran by Israel in cahoots with the US and the West in general.

“I have been so disturbed that I could not sleep and have woken at 3 in the morning to write you this open letter,” Aiyar wrote.

Aiyar claimed that he had put his political career on the line by not only voting for Tharoor in the election to the post of the Congress president, even when he knew Tharoor would be badly defeated, but also by writing in The Indian Express next day that the victor, Mallikarjun Kharge, should magnanimously respect his democratic right to stand against him despite his being backed to the hilt by both the Gandhi family and the scattered remnants of the G-23.

“I argued fiercely that he (Kharge) should grant you (Tharoor) an honourable place in the Congress hierarchy, as befits a mature political party, to fully use your many talents. In consequence, the Gandhis and Kharge have refused to meet me ever since. Nevertheless, I felt vindicated on moral grounds,” Aiyar said in his “open letter to Shashi Tharoor on moral amnesia, and more”.

“I now find I should have championed a worthier cause. Your shameful espousal last night of ‘might is right’ has horrified me. You say you fully understand the reason why Foreign Minister S Jaishankar is extremely wary of taking on the Americans: fear of the ‘consequences’ that may result for India, particularly its economy.

“As Chairman of the Standing Committee, you surrender decision-making on foreign policy to the government because only they have all the required information. Then what are you doing in your high office?” he said, slamming Tharoor.

Aiyar said the scales fell from his eyes over Tharoor’s rejection of the Supreme Court decision on allowing menstruating women to enter the temple at Sabarimala.

“I could barely believe my ears that an intelligent, scholarly, modern-minded St. Stephen’s graduate, and postgraduate from an Ivy League college, could be so backward as to endorse a thoroughly sexist, gender-discriminatory practice that punishes women only because of their natural bodily functions,” Aiyar said.

“But those were the early signals that you weren’t quite ‘one of us’. Now, your profound empathy with a regime that stinks of communal malice has put the lid on it. This is the parting of ways,” Aiyar said in his piece.

Hitting back at Aiyar, Tharoor penned an open letter that has been published by NDTV on Thursday, in which he said disagreement is a hallmark of a thriving democracy, but questioning a colleague’s motives or patriotism simply because they adopt a different approach to foreign policy does little to strengthen public debate.

“While you are entitled to your views, your recent public ‘assessment’ of my positions (and my character) demands an unambiguous response,” Tharoor said.

“I have always approached international affairs from a clear nationalist perspective, placing India’s interests, security, and global standing at the heart of every discussion. Recognising geopolitical realities and weighing consequences for India’s economy and strategic position is not ‘moral surrender’; it is responsible statecraft,” Tharoor said.

India’s diplomacy has historically balanced principle with pragmatism, he argued.

Tharoor said Aiyar’s allegations regarding his foreign travels are beneath contempt.

“Aside from Operation Sindoor, where I was part of and led an all-party delegation, all my foreign travels are undertaken in a personal capacity. They are neither requested, organised, nor financed by the government. I receive far more international invitations than I can possibly accept, none of which have anything to do with my position as Committee Chairman... To suggest I am ‘pleasing the PM’ to secure travel is a baseless slur,” he said.

As for Sabarimala, Tharoor said he is slightly amused that after attacking him for allegedly heretical views, Aiyar is criticising him on this issue for going along with the Party’s considered stand on the matter.

“I also took the trouble to explain my position at the time at length, but clearly you have not bothered to digest it,” Tharoor added.

“I am grateful to you for having supported me in the AICC Presidential election. It was precisely the stand of principle you say you would wish to applaud, so I am sorry you now regret it. I, too, supported you very strongly with the ‘high command’ of the party, especially when you were suspended from its membership. I have no regrets that that injustice has been reversed,” Tharoor said.

It was, nonetheless, disingenuous of you to announce a parting of the ways at the end of your letter, he said, slamming Aiyar.

“The parting had already come in the course of your many gratuitous comments about my character ever since I spoke up on Operation Sindoor. I have refrained from reacting publicly so far, but your recent comments leave me no choice,” Tharoor signed off.