He said to ANI, “The final authority will be the Congress high command, which will decide whether to take action against him or allow him to remain in the party. We are not ready to cooperate with him in Kerala because he always keeps attacking the Congress and Indira Gandhi. In the last one year, PM Modi did not say a single word about Sanjay Gandhi but he accused Sanjay Gandhi. He always opposes Rahul Gandhi’s statement.”
K Muraleedharan added, “We are upset with his performance in Kerala. He is no longer coming to his parliamentary constituency…We have decided that we will not cooperate with him in the upcoming local body elections. We will follow the instructions given by the high command…”
Recently, Congress MP Shashi Tharoor, while addressing the issues related to party high command, stated that sometimes it is necessary to cooperate with other parties in the interest of national security.
Tharoor while speaking during an event in Kochi, was answering a student’s query related to his relations with the Congress party leadership.
The Congress MP emphasised that, for him, national security will always come first. According to him, the main perspective of any political party is to make a better India.”Politics is unfortunately or otherwise in any democracy is about competition. As a result when people like me say it that we respect our parties we have certain values and convictions which keep us in our parties. But we need to cooperate with other parties in the interest of national security the question you asked. Sometimes the parties feel that is disloyal to them and that becomes a big problem which is your first loyalty? To my mind the nation comes first”, he said.”Parties are a means of making the nation better. So to my mind whichever party you belong to the objective of that party is to create a better India in it’s own way. The parties have the right to disagree about the best way of doing that, the best way of making a better India”, Tharoor said during the event.
Tharoor stressed that his commitment is towards a better and safe India whose borders are secure.
“Some of us may say, let’s say, more capitalism. Some may say more socialism. Some may be in favour of certain kinds of regulatory controls. Some may be against too much regulation. So you have different points of view. That’s fine. But ultimately, we must all be committed to a better India, a safer India, an India whose borders are protected, whose territory is safe, whose people’s well-being can be nurtured. And that is my commitment”, he said.
The Congress MP further urged all the political parties to stay united when the nation is “imperiled”. He quoted former India PM Jawaharlal Nehru famous quote, “Who lives if India dies? And that’s a question to which there is no answer. India must come first, and then only can we all live.”
“I’m saying it to all parties. Put your differences aside when the nation is imperiled. Because if there is no India, there’s a very famous line of Nehru’s, which I am very fond of quoting. Who lives if India dies? And that’s a question to which there is no answer. India must come first, and then only can we all live,” he said.
On Sunday, Revolutionary Socialist Party MP, N K Premachandran in an abrasive response to Tharoor’s “nation first” stance, stated that all political parties aim for betterment of the country and none act against national interests.
Premachandran, the Lok Sabha MP from Kollam when asked about Tharoor’s remarks responded that the latter “should understand one thing that the party is for the betterment of the people and the nation.”
“It can never be against the nation’s interest. How can you distinguish between the party’s interest and the national interest? All parties under the representation of the People’s Act, the Indian National Congress, as well as my party, RSP, all the political parties are for the betterment of the people. Can he say that the Congress Party is standing against the national interest?,” the RSP leader said.
He added, “None of the parties are standing against the interests of the nation. We will have a difference of opinion. So the distinction between the party’s interest and the nation’s interest is not correct…”
