Senior Congress leader and Rajya Sabha MP Digvijaya Singh has once again found himself at the centre of a political storm, this time for a social media post that appeared to praise the organisational structure of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). The post, which triggered swift backlash, forced Singh to issue a clarification while reigniting debates about his propensity for controversial remarks.
The Social Media Post and Swift Clarification
Singh shared a black-and-white photograph from the 1990s, sourced from Quora, showing a young Narendra Modi sitting beside senior BJP leader LK Advani at a Gujarat event. In his post, the former Madhya Pradesh chief minister pointed out that the BJP-RSS framework allows grassroots workers to rise within the organisation to top positions like chief minister and prime minister.
The implied praise for the Sangh's structure did not go unnoticed. By Saturday, Singh issued a clarification, stating that while he values robust organisational structures, he continues to strongly stand against the RSS and Prime Minister Narendra Modi. This attempt to contain the damage, however, had already set off a chain reaction within political circles.
Congress spokesperson Pawan Khera was quick to respond, drawing a sharp contrast between the two organisations. He asserted that an organization known for (Nathuram) Godse cannot teach anything to an organization founded by Mahatma Gandhi, a clear reference to the RSS and the Congress respectively.
A History of Controversial Remarks
This incident is far from an isolated one for the 78-year-old, two-time Rajya Sabha MP from Madhya Pradesh. Digvijaya Singh has a long track record of making statements that put his own party on the defensive.
Questioning the 2016 Surgical Strikes: In 2023, Singh triggered a massive row by questioning the authenticity of the 2016 surgical strikes conducted by the Indian Army after the Uri attack. He claimed there was 'no proof' and accused the Modi government of peddling lies. The BJP accused the Congress of insulting the armed forces, while the Congress distanced itself, with senior leader Jairam Ramesh clarifying it was not the party's position.
The 'Hindu Terror' Remarks: In December 2021, Singh claimed that slain Maharashtra ATS chief Hemant Karkare had told him about threats from Hindu right-wing activists. While he later clarified he never said Hindu terrorists killed Karkare, he stood by his statement that Hindu groups were harassing the officer. The BJP accused him of maligning Hinduism, and the Congress again stated his views were private.
Batla House Encounter Stance: Singh has been heavily criticised for publicly describing the 2008 Batla House encounter in Delhi as 'fake' and demanding a judicial probe. He refused to apologise even after investigations by the then Congress-led government's Home Ministry upheld the encounter's genuineness.
Criticising P Chidambaram: In 2010, he publicly criticised the then Home Minister P Chidambaram's anti-Naxal strategy, calling it narrow and calling Chidambaram 'intellectually arrogant'. The comments caused embarrassment for the UPA government, leading Singh to express regret for the discomfort caused, though he stuck to his policy critique.
Political Repercussions and the Road Ahead
Digvijaya Singh's latest comments have highlighted the persistent tension his statements create within the Congress party. While he is a senior leader with significant experience, his remarks often force the party into a reactive mode, having to publicly disassociate itself to control the political narrative.
The BJP has consistently used his statements to paint the entire Congress party as being at odds with national security institutions and Hindu sentiments. This pattern underscores the challenges political parties face in managing outspoken senior leaders whose personal views can sometimes overshadow the party's official stance.
As Singh's current Rajya Sabha term continues until 2026, his propensity for sparking debates ensures he remains a prominent, if controversial, figure in India's political landscape, often forcing his own party to walk a tightrope between internal democracy and public messaging discipline.
