Poonam Sharma
The controversy triggered by a senior Congress leader Prithvi Raj Chavan’s comparison of India with Venezuela is not an isolated slip of the tongue. It is a window into a deeper political decay—one that reveals how far the Congress party has drifted from its historical understanding of national dignity, sovereignty, and institutional strength. When a leader casually raises the possibility of India facing a Venezuela-style collapse, the problem is not merely political rhetoric; it is the mindset behind it.
The Venezuela Comparison: A Dangerous Political Imagination
India is not Venezuela. This should not even need to be stated. Venezuela collapsed under economic mismanagement, institutional erosion, and prolonged external pressure. India, by contrast, operates under a robust constitutional framework, an independent judiciary, a professional military, and a deeply embedded electoral culture. To draw a parallel between the two is not critical thinking—it is political nihilism.
The Venezuela remark reflects an opposition that no longer believes it can defeat the ruling dispensation democratically. When electoral defeat becomes routine, imagination replaces strategy. Instead of asking why the public is not voting for us, the narrative shifts to what catastrophe might remove the government. This is not opposition politics; it is wishful instability.
More troubling is what such comparisons signal internationally. When Indian leaders themselves suggest that their country is on the brink of collapse, they weaken India’s global standing. This is not dissent; it is self-sabotage.
Congress and the Forgotten Lesson of Indira Gandhi’s Humiliation
Perhaps the most ironic aspect of today’s Congress rhetoric is its selective memory. The same party that now flirts with foreign comparisons and external validation seems to have forgotten one of its most painful diplomatic moments.
In 1971, despite India’s moral high ground during the Bangladesh Liberation War, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was made to wait for hours by U.S. President Richard Nixon. Has Congress forgotten that humiliation was not symbolic—it was real, documented, and deeply instructive. Has the Political nature of Congress totally changed ? has it become a submissive of the colonial mindset that still inclines in one form or the other?
Indira Gandhi learned that lesson. She pivoted decisively toward strategic autonomy. Today’s Congress, however, appears to have learned the opposite lesson—that foreign pressure, international narratives, and external approval can be used as political tools at home. This is a dangerous reversal. The question must be asked: has Congress forgotten its own history, or has it consciously abandoned it?
Leadership Vacuum and the Culture of Political Flattery
The current nature of the Congress party cannot be understood without addressing its internal decay. Leadership has been replaced by loyalty. Merit has been replaced by proximity. The party is increasingly driven by a small circle where survival depends not on performance, but on pleasing the high command.
This ecosystem encourages extreme statements. The more provocative the remark, the more attention it earns. Leaders who no longer command influence in their states resort to national outrage as a substitute for relevance. Venezuela becomes a metaphor not because it fits, but because it shocks.
Meanwhile, credible internal voices—those who caution against equating government defeat with national defeat—are sidelined. The result is an echo chamber where political fantasy masquerades as analysis.
From Love for Bharat to Contempt for Stability
At its core, the crisis is not ideological but emotional. Congress once positioned itself as a party that, despite disagreements, placed Bharat above power. That sentiment appears diluted today. Time to Time Rahul Gandhi too exposes the internal intentions .
Criticizing a government is democratic. Undermining faith in the nation’s stability is not. When leaders repeatedly imply that India is vulnerable to coups, kidnappings, or foreign-engineered regime change, they cross a moral line. They replace patriotism with resentment.
This raises an uncomfortable question: has the Congress drifted into a traitor-like political instinct—not in the legal sense, but in the philosophical one? A mindset where the defeat of the ruling party becomes more important than the strength of the nation itself.
A Party at War with Its Own Legacy
The Congress party today appears estranged from its own past. It has forgotten the cost of international humiliation, the value of institutional strength, and the difference between opposing a government and weakening a nation.
The Venezuela remark is not the disease—it is the symptom. The real crisis lies in a political culture that no longer believes in electoral renewal, only in disruption. Until Congress rediscovers its connection with Bharat—not as a rhetorical device, but as a moral anchor—it will continue to drift further from relevance, and dangerously, further from responsibility.
The tragedy is not that Congress is losing elections. After recent elections in Mumbai the tragedy is that in losing power, it risks losing its sense of nationhood.
