Rahul Gandhi’s Divisive Politics: From Stoking Internal Rifts to Undermining Bharatiya Sovereignty

Paromita Das

GG News Bureau
New Delhi, 17^th Jan. Rahul Gandhi, often referred to as the “nawabzade” of the Gandhian dynasty, has been a polarizing figure in Bharatiya politics. Over the years, his political strategies have consistently involved exploiting divisive issues—be it fostering caste tensions, creating a North-South divide, or engaging in overt Muslim appeasement. Now, in a shocking escalation, Gandhi appears to have crossed a new line by declaring a “fight” not just against the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) or the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) but against the Bharatiya state itself.

His recent remarks at the inauguration of the Congress Party’s new headquarters, accusing the BJP and RSS of controlling every institution in the country, have sparked widespread outrage. By framing his political battle as one against the “Indian State,” Gandhi has revealed a deeper and more concerning agenda that goes beyond electoral rivalry. This article examines the trajectory of Rahul Gandhi’s divisive rhetoric, controversial alliances, and attempts to destabilize Bharat’s unity and sovereignty.

A Dangerous Declaration: Targeting the Bharatiya State

At the Congress headquarters inauguration, Rahul Gandhi alleged that the BJP and RSS have taken control of Bharat’s institutions and declared, “Our battle is now against the BJP, the RSS, and the Indian State itself.” This statement is not only politically charged but dangerously subversive, calling into question his allegiance to the very institutions he seeks to lead.

While criticizing political opponents is a common feature of democracy, Gandhi’s framing of his party’s struggle as a war against the Bharatiya state has raised serious concerns about his motives. His rhetoric not only undermines public confidence in India’s democratic institutions but also portrays a distorted image of the country to international audiences.

Twisting Constitutional Definitions: The ‘Union of States’ Narrative

One of Gandhi’s recurring narratives has been his insistence on defining India as a “Union of States,” a phrase selectively extracted from Article 1 of the Bharatiya Constitution. While this terminology is constitutionally accurate, Gandhi’s interpretation undermines the civilizational unity of Bharat by presenting the country as a mere administrative arrangement rather than a cohesive nation.

Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, the architect of the Constitution, clarified that the term “Union” signifies the indestructibility of Bharat’s federation, where states cannot secede. By omitting this critical context, Gandhi reduces Bharat to a patchwork of regions, disregarding its shared cultural, historical, and spiritual heritage. This divisive narrative aligns with Congress’s longstanding position of emphasizing regionalism over national unity, further fueling rifts within Bharatiya society.

Foreign Interventions: Gandhi’s Dangerous Alliances

Rahul Gandhi’s foreign visits and meetings with controversial figures have also drawn significant criticism. In 2023, during a trip to the United States, Gandhi met with Donald Lu, the US Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs. Known for his interference in the internal affairs of nations, Lu has a track record of promoting regime change and undermining the sovereignty of countries under the pretext of human rights advocacy.

During the visit, Gandhi openly criticized Bharat’s democratic framework, essentially inviting foreign intervention—a move that many viewed as a betrayal of national interests. This is not the first time Gandhi has courted controversy on foreign soil. His 2017 secret meeting with the Chinese ambassador during the Doklam standoff and the Congress Party’s 2008 MoU with the Communist Party of China have long raised questions about his loyalties.

North-South Divide: Sowing Regional Discontent

Gandhi has repeatedly attempted to stoke regional tensions, particularly by framing a North-South divide in Bharat. In 2021, while campaigning in Kerala, he implied that voters in the North lacked political awareness compared to their Southern counterparts, a statement widely criticized as divisive and dismissive of the electorate that once supported him in Amethi.

By pitting one region against another, Gandhi perpetuates a narrative that erodes national unity, further alienating communities along regional lines. His comments not only insult millions of Bharatiya but also undermine the ethos of a unified Bharat.

Caste Politics: Dividing Society for Political Gain

Rahul Gandhi’s recent push for a caste census and his calls for reservations in the private sector are yet another example of his divisive politics. While the idea of a caste census is framed as a step toward empowering marginalized communities, it is clear that Gandhi’s intentions are more about creating a vote bank than fostering social equality.

By proposing to expand reservation quotas beyond 50% and introducing caste-based reservations in private industries, Gandhi risks alienating large sections of society and undermining economic growth. These policies, devoid of a clear roadmap, are designed to deepen societal rifts rather than address systemic inequalities.

Muslim Appeasement and Undermining National Security

Gandhi’s history of Muslim appeasement is well-documented, from his silence on the persecution of Kashmiri Pandits to his vocal opposition to the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). His party’s support for organizations and individuals accused of anti-national activities, such as signing mercy petitions for convicted terrorists, further highlights his willingness to compromise national security for political gains.

By positioning himself as a champion of minority rights while ignoring the concerns of the majority, Gandhi alienates large sections of Bharatiya society. His selective outrage and inconsistent stance on key issues expose the opportunism underlying his political strategy.

A Troubling Pattern of Division and Subversion

Rahul Gandhi’s actions and rhetoric reveal a troubling pattern of division, subversion, and disregard for Bharat’s unity and sovereignty. From stoking regional and caste tensions to inviting foreign intervention and aligning with controversial figures, Gandhi’s approach to politics appears more focused on destabilizing the nation than addressing its challenges.

His recent declaration of a fight against the Bharatiya state underscores a dangerous escalation in his divisive politics. By framing his party’s struggles as a battle against the state, Gandhi undermines public trust in democratic institutions and fuels discontent among vulnerable sections of society.

At a time when Bharat is emerging as a global power, such rhetoric risks tarnishing the nation’s image and weakening its internal cohesion. Gandhi’s willingness to compromise national unity for political gain raises serious questions about his vision for Bharat and his commitment to its people.

Conclusion: The Path Forward for Bharat

Rahul Gandhi’s divisive rhetoric and actions stand in stark contrast to the inclusive vision of Bharat enshrined in its Constitution. While political rivalry is a natural part of democracy, the deliberate erosion of national unity for personal and political gains is a betrayal of the trust placed in leaders by the people.

Bharat, as a civilizational state, thrives on its diversity and unity. Leaders have a responsibility to strengthen these bonds, not weaken them. As the nation moves forward, it is imperative to reject narratives that seek to divide and focus instead on fostering a shared vision of progress, harmony, and development.

The Bharatiya electorate has consistently shown its wisdom in recognizing and rejecting divisive politics. As Gandhi continues to test the limits of his rhetoric, it is clear that the people of Bharat will stand united in safeguarding the nation’s unity and sovereignty, reaffirming their commitment to the idea of Bharat.