Rao alleges that organisations linked to the Bharat Summit have been involved in attempts to destabilise governments in other countries.
He says criticism of the government by Indian political parties is legitimate but objects to foreign delegates criticising India on Indian soil.
He accuses Rahul Gandhi of failing to fulfil his election promises to Telangana and says he was placed under house arrest until Gandhi left Hyderabad.
Interview | ‘I Was Put Under House Arrest For Opposing Bharat Summit’: Telangana BJP Chief
The Telangana BJP chief N. Ramchander Rao says he was kept under house arrest, and explains why the party opposed the Bharat Summit
Summary
Telangana BJP president N. Ramchander Rao says he was placed under house arrest for opposing the Bharat Summit, which he alleges was used to promote Rahul Gandhi’s views to an international audience. Billed as a platform for dialogue, investment and cooperation, the Congress-backed summit in Hyderabad drew BJP criticism over its links to organisations the party claims are tied to attempts at regime change in other countries
In an interview with Outlook, Rao explains the BJP’s objections to the summit, alleges that some participating organisations are involved in efforts to destabilise governments abroad, and argues that foreign visitors should not be allowed to use Indian soil to criticise the country.
Asked to distinguish criticism of the Modi government from hostility towards India, he says the BJP has no objection to domestic political parties questioning government policies, but objects to foreign delegates doing so. He also turns the criticism on Rahul Gandhi, accusing him of failing to fulfil election promises made to Telangana voters.
Edited excerpts of the interview:
What are your objections to the Bharat Summit? And could you also explain the circumstances surrounding your house arrest?
The Bharat Summit was initially presented as a platform to attract global investment, bringing delegates from across the country and the world to explore investment opportunities in Telangana. However, it later became clear that the event was intended to showcase Rahul Gandhi’s views to an international audience. Salman Khurshid also made a statement on the issue and subsequently tweeted about it.
We learnt that Progressive International and Progressive Alliance, which co-sponsored an event in 2025, were associated with the gathering. According to a Fox News investigation, Progressive International has been involved in mobilising students in several countries to protest and demand regime change.
We have objections because many of those attending the meeting have previously expressed views against India. A Norwegian speaker, for instance, had written five articles criticising Prime Minister Narendra Modi and India. Why should people who have expressed such views be invited to India to speak against the country?
These forces are attempting to create anarchy across the world. They have been associated with developments in Bangladesh, Nepal, France and Albania. We believe this summit is a similar exercise, and we oppose it.
There is another reason for our protest. When Rahul Gandhi visited Telangana during the elections, he made six guarantees to the people of the state. These included employment opportunities for students, reservations for BCs and annual financial assistance of Rs 15,000 to farmers. However, the Congress government has not fulfilled these promises. What right does Rahul Gandhi have to come to Telangana after making commitments to the people and failing to fulfil them?
The summit has effectively become an anti-Bharat Summit, where issues are likely to be discussed in a manner that portrays India negatively. Rahul Gandhi himself has travelled abroad and made statements describing India as a dead economy and claiming that Parliament does not function. We do not want such narratives to be promoted from Telangana.
Advertisement
You mentioned that you were under house arrest. What happened, and did the police explicitly tell you that you cannot step outside?
I have been under house arrest since early morning. A large number of police personnel have been deployed outside my residence, and I have not been allowed to leave until Rahul Gandhi leaves the city. A police inspector and two Assistant Commissioners of Police came to my residence and told me that I was under house arrest. They said that if I stepped outside, they would have to take me into custody.
The BJP has alleged that some of the organisations involved are linked to George Soros. Is there evidence connecting them, or is this based on the nature of their activities?
You are asking about evidence, and that is a different matter. A Fox News investigation has revealed the involvement of Progressive Alliance and Progressive International. Progressive International has itself acknowledged its involvement in the regime-change movements in Bangladesh, Nepal and elsewhere.
These are matters that are available to the Indian government. That is why the Centre cancelled the visas of several delegates at the last moment. These are people who have created unrest elsewhere and are now attempting to do the same in India.
This evidence is sufficient for us. The government may not be able to make all the evidence public, but we have to connect the dots. When we do so, it becomes clear that their intentions are questionable and that they want to create unrest in the country.
Advertisement
If some of the invited delegates are critical of the Modi government, does that make them anti-India? How do you distinguish between criticism of the government and hostility towards the country?
In a democracy, criticism must be welcomed. If someone does not agree with the policies of Prime Minister Modi, they have every right to express their views. Similarly, when we were in the Opposition, we had the right to criticise the government, and we continue to do so wherever we are in the Opposition.
Our objection is that people coming from other countries must respect India's systems and institutions. They cannot come here, make statements against the country and provoke people.
Other countries, including the United States, examine people's social media posts when considering visa applications. Even after someone enters the US, they can be deported if their social media activity is found to be objectionable. These are the rules followed by other countries. Why should India be so liberal towards people who speak against it?
We cannot allow India to become a platform where foreign visitors come and criticise the country. The Congress and Communist parties are free to criticise the government. We have no objection to that. But why should Indian issues be internationalised?
We have suffered in the past when domestic issues were taken to international forums. The Kashmir issue was taken to the United Nations, and there were attempts to internationalise the question of Hyderabad State as well, when the Nizam wanted it to be discussed at the UN.
We oppose foreign countries or foreign visitors coming to Indian soil to criticise our systems, government and democracy. We are the world's largest democracy, and we are proud that it has survived despite its many contradictions. Our own people are capable of questioning and criticising the government. Why should foreigners come here to do it?
Advertisement
Published At: