New Delhi: The political confrontation over Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s “dimagi Naxal” remark escalated on Tuesday, with Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju accusing the Congress of gradually becoming a “Maoist party” and questioning Rahul Gandhi’s conduct as Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha.
Rijiju maintained that Modi’s Independence Day remarks were not aimed at any specific Opposition party. However, he claimed that Congress leaders had interpreted the statement as a direct attack on them and had subsequently connected themselves with what he termed “ideological Naxalism”.
The latest exchange came amid a continuing war of words between the BJP and the Congress over the Prime Minister’s address from the Red Fort. It also followed a chaotic Monsoon Session that was marked by repeated disruptions and adjournments.
Rijiju Links Congress To Maoist Ideology
Speaking to ANI, Rijiju alleged that the Congress had undergone a major ideological shift.
“In a way, the Congress party has transformed itself into a Maoist and Naxalite entity,” Rijiju told ANI.
He claimed that the National Advisory Council formed during the Congress-led government had earlier included several people sympathetic to such ideologies.
“Having already become akin to the Muslim League, they are now moving towards becoming a Maoist party as well,” he said.
Rijiju said the term “ideological Naxalism” covered separatist thinking and support for issues such as restoring Article 370 or seeking to separate the northeastern region from the rest of the country.
He also sought to support Modi’s argument by referring to a statement made by former prime minister Manmohan Singh on the threat posed by Naxalism.
“The Prime Minister’s point — echoing what Manmohan Singh had also stated — is that Maoism and Naxalism pose the greatest threat to the country’s internal security and must be eradicated,” Rijiju said.
While claiming that armed Naxalism had been largely defeated during the Modi government’s tenure, the minister alleged that its ideological influence remained active in urban centres.
“Congress thought this was about them,” he said.
The controversy began during Modi’s Independence Day speech, when he said armed Naxals operating in forests had been eliminated but warned that “dimagi Naxals” still needed to be “identified and isolated”.
Congress leader and Rajya Sabha MP P Chidambaram responded to the remark on X by writing: “I am proud to be a dimagi naxal!”
Other Congress leaders have described the phrase as a politically motivated slur aimed at those opposing the BJP. They have also compared it with expressions such as “urban Naxals”, “Andolanjeevi” and “tukde tukde gang”.
Rijiju had on Monday referred to Manmohan Singh’s 2006 remarks on Naxalism while demanding that the Congress apologise to the former prime minister’s family for its criticism of Modi.
Minister Questions Rahul’s House Conduct
Rijiju’s criticism also focused on Rahul Gandhi’s performance as the Lok Sabha’s Leader of Opposition. He questioned whether Gandhi’s conduct inside the House reflected the responsibilities attached to the constitutional position.
“You have observed the parliamentary process from the start and seen how Rahul Gandhi conducts himself inside the House. Does he come across as a Leader of the Opposition?” Rijiju said.
The minister said he had no personal disagreement with Gandhi but insisted that the office required a higher standard of behaviour and parliamentary engagement.
“A Leader of the Opposition must perform in a way that upholds the stature and dignity of the role; one has to speak in the House accordingly,” he said.
Rijiju alleged that Gandhi’s style of functioning had influenced other Congress MPs and claimed that some members of the party had privately approached him because they wanted Parliament to operate normally.
He accused the Congress of choosing slogans and disruptions instead of participating in structured debates.
“If a Member of Parliament only wants to create a ruckus, what is the need for them to be an MP? They could just protest on the streets,” he said.
The Congress had demanded a statement from Union Home Minister Amit Shah over the police action against protesters at Jantar Mantar on July 20.
Rijiju said the government had been willing to hold a discussion on the matter. He, however, accused the Congress of using the demand as a pretext to avoid engaging with the government on the floor of the House.
“The Congress party got scared to face the Parliament. That is why they made the excuse of running away from the discussion,” he said.
He further alleged that Rahul Gandhi had created a group whose principal objective was to disrupt proceedings and abuse political opponents.
Rijiju said MPs who wanted to raise serious matters were instead being pushed into the role of supporters for slogan-shouting and protests.
Rijiju Attacks Gandhi Over Modi Swipe
The Union minister also criticised Gandhi over his recent comments on Modi’s foreign-policy engagements.
At the Congress’s Rachnatmak National Convention on August 13, Rahul Gandhi criticised Prime Minister Narendra Modi over his public interactions with world leaders. During the address, Gandhi hugged Congress leader Sandeep Dikshit, an episode that later became part of a political controversy after Dikshit referred to Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni.
The BJP seized on the remark and accused the Congress of making inappropriate comments about foreign leaders. Union minister Kiren Rijiju said Gandhi’s attempt to mock Modi had ultimately rebounded on him.
“Rahul Gandhi tried to mock the Prime Minister in a theatrical manner, but in the end, he only succeeded in making a laughingstock of himself,” he said.
Meanwhile, Parliament’s Monsoon Session ended on July 20 after 19 sittings held over 25 days. The two Houses passed 12 Bills, but only the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Amendment Bill, 2026, underwent discussion.
The Opposition used the session to raise issues including the NEET-UG protests, its demand for a statement from Union Home Minister Amit Shah and allegations of financial irregularities involving donations to the Ram Mandir.
