Aiyar’s remarks came amid news of a deepening rift between him and the party top brass.
Explaining his rationale, Aiyar said Rahul Gandhi is about 30 years younger than him and that he has not had the opportunity to work with him. Given this age gap and the lack of shared political engagement, he said he does not see himself as aligned in that sense.
Aiyar also made it clear that he does not identify as an “Indiravian”, stating that he completely disapproved of Indira Gandhi’s decision to declare the Emergency, which lasted 18 months, describing it as a conversion of democracy into tyranny.
Speaking to news agency PTI, the former Union minister reiterated that he considers himself shaped by the legacies of Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru and Rajiv Gandhi.
Recalling his early years, Aiyar said he was six years old when Mahatma Gandhi lifted him and his younger brother in his arms and affectionately referred to them as the sun and moon of his eyes. That childhood memory, he said, left a lasting imprint and shaped his self-identification as a Gandhian.
On Nehru, Aiyar noted that he was six when Nehru became prime minister and 23 when his tenure ended. His formative years, he said, unfolded under the Nehruvian ethos, which explains why he regards himself as a Nehruvian.Aiyar described himself as a Rajivian because it was Rajiv Gandhi, though two years younger than him, who brought him into the Prime Minister’s Office and entrusted him with significant responsibilities. That experience, he said, deeply influenced his political journey.
At the same time, he reiterated that he could not call himself an Indiravian due to his strong opposition to the Emergency, even though it lasted for only 18 months.
This comes amid sustained coverage on Aiyar’s strained relations with the party.
The friction began after Aiyar, speaking at an international seminar in Thiruvananthapuram on Sunday, expressed confidence that Pinarayi Vijayan of the CPI(M) would continue as Kerala’s chief minister. The event was inaugurated by Vijayan.
During his address, Aiyar said that in the presence of the chief minister, whom he believed would return to office, he renewed his appeal to strengthen Kerala’s position as the leading Panchayati Raj state in the country. He suggested that state laws should be amended based on practical experience, insights from Thomas Isaac, the five-volume report he chaired, and a note on district planning by V Ramachandran that had been circulated by the Planning Commission when it actively supported Panchayati Raj.
The Congress subsequently distanced itself from Aiyar’s comments, stating that he has had no connection with the party for the past few years and that he speaks and writes purely in his personal capacity. The party asserted that the people of Kerala would bring the Congress-led United Democratic Front (UDF) back to power in the state for what it described as more responsible and responsive governance.
On Monday, a day after suggesting that the Left Democratic Front (LDF) led by Vijayan would retain power in Kerala, Aiyar launched a sharp attack on several party colleagues. He described Shashi Tharoor, the Thiruvananthapuram MP, as an unprincipled careerist, referred to AICC general secretary (organisation) K. C. Venugopal as a rowdy, and also took aim at party veteran Ramesh Chennithala.
