Congress Divided Over Jibe At Jaishankar Amid Operation Sindoor Row

Congress again raised questions about whether External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar informed Pakistan about attacks on the terrorist infrastructure and if India lost any aircrafts during the India-Pakistan escalation this month.

Rahul Gandhi’s previous similar claims were rejected by the Ministry of External Affairs and Press Information Bureau as misinformation. The opposition Congress party in the wake of Operation Sindoor had pledged support to the government’s retaliation after the Pahalgam attack that killed at least 26 civilians.

However, yesterday, Pawan Khera used an AICC briefing to repeat the claims of India informing Pakistan of the attack. Gandhi, on May 19, said on X, "EAM Jaishankar’s silence isn’t just telling — it’s damning. So I’ll ask again: How many Indian aircraft did we lose because Pakistan knew? This wasn’t a lapse. It was a crime. And the nation deserves the truth.”

“Prime Minister Modi and the Foreign Minister will have to answer why this was done...The government should answer how many aircraft did the country lose,” Khera, head of Congress media department, reiterated yesterday. 

“What losses did the country suffer? How many terrorists escaped? What does it mean that you informed them? Do you trust the terrorists so much that they will stay there once you inform them? What is your relationship with them? Do you call this strategy? I am sorry, but in village language, it is called mukhbiri (acting as an informant). This is spying, a crime and betrayal,” he continued to allege.

However, not all Congress party leaders are in agreement with this line of argument, as per The Indian Express.

On Khera calling EAM a “mukhbir,” a senior Congress leader said, “I don’t agree. I don’t know whether it is a line decided by the party at the highest level or his (Khera’s) own on-the-spot creation.”

The Congress leader said, “To call Jaishankar an informer is stretching it a bit too far. Every issue has a certain elasticity..you don’t stretch it to the bone. In politics, you try to make a point but don’t stretch it too far which hurts the original point,” adding that the Congress party should rather be raising specific lapses.

The leader mentioned, “I agree there are some flaws which we can point out. There was an element of intelligence failure in the Pahalgam attack, there was mismanagement in the way the US President (first) announced the ceasefire… even agreeing to a ceasefire immediately. You could have made Pakistan beg for it for a couple of days..The fact that no big country stood with India on the issue of terrorism is another point..because it became a India-Pakistan war-like situation and world capitals were seeing it through the prism of war and not terrorism, which was the original issue..These are issues. But we should make these points in a calibrated manner.”

Another leader said that the party is losing the bigger picture by entering into a narrow lane.

The root of the issue lies in the statement by EAM Jaishankar when he said, “At the start of the operation, we had sent a message to Pakistan saying we are striking at terrorists’ infrastructure. We are not striking at the military. So the military has an option of standing out and not interfering in this process. They chose not to take that good advice.”

However, as per the Indian Express, the EAM was speaking about the call made by Director General of Military Operations Lt General Rajiv Ghai to his Pakistani counterpart Major General Kashif Abdullah after the commencement of Operation Sindoor.

Lt Gen Ghai had told the Pakistani DGMO that India had hit “carefully chosen” terror targets and had not struck military targets. A message was also relayed that India is willing to engage if Pakistan wishes, as per The Indian Express.

After Gandhi’s first X post alleging EAM of wrongdoings, the MEA stated “The External Affairs Minister had stated that we had warned Pakistan at the start, which is clearly the early phase after Op Sindoor’s commencement. This is being falsely represented as being before the commencement. This utter misrepresentation of facts is being called out.”