Senior Congress leader Digvijaya Singh’s recent remarks on the organisational strength of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) have triggered a fresh political storm, drawing reactions both within his party and from political opponents. While Singh highlighted the structural efficiency of the RSS and BJP, his comments sparked debates over the ideological divide between India’s oldest political party and its right-wing rivals.

Singh’s observations, intended as a commentary on organisational capacity, immediately drew criticism from several Congress leaders who pointedly reminded the public of the party’s historical identity and the RSS’s association with Nathuram Godse, the assassin of Mahatma Gandhi. The episode also prompted the BJP to attack Congress leadership, particularly Rahul Gandhi, raising questions about internal cohesion and strategic direction within the grand old party.

What Digvijaya Singh Said

The controversy began on December 27, when Digvijaya Singh shared a black-and-white photograph from the 1990s on Quora, a question-and-answer platform. The image showed a young Narendra Modi sitting on the floor beside senior BJP leader L.K. Advani during an event in Gujarat. Sharing the picture on X, Singh wrote: “I found this picture on the Quora site. It is very impressive. In what way did the grassroots swayamsevak of RSS and the worker of Jan Sangh sit on the floor at the feet of leaders and become the Chief Minister of the state and the Prime Minister of the country? This is the power of the organisation. Jai Siya Ram.”

In his post, Singh tagged several senior Congress leaders, including party president Mallikarjun Kharge, Rahul Gandhi, Jairam Ramesh, and Priyanka Gandhi. The post, intended to underscore the organisational discipline and long-term planning of the RSS and BJP, immediately became a talking point across social media and political circles.

Singh’s comments were aimed at highlighting how structured grassroots efforts can translate into political ascendancy. According to him, the transformation of a volunteer or party worker from the ground level into influential political positions illustrates the “power of organisation,” a concept he believes the Congress could learn from to improve its own political efficiency.

BJP’s Response and Political Counterattack

The BJP seized the opportunity to critique both Singh and the Congress leadership. BJP leader C.R. Kesavan commented that the post exposed the party’s internal leadership style. “The post totally exposed how the Congress first family ruthlessly runs the party in a dictatorial manner and also how autocratic and undemocratic this Congress leadership is,” Kesavan said, indirectly targeting Rahul Gandhi.

The remarks, coming on the heels of Singh’s post, gave the BJP ample scope to portray the Congress as a party that struggles with internal discipline and leadership issues, contrasting it with the tightly run organisational machinery of the RSS and BJP.

Congress Leaders’ Reactions

Reactions within the Congress were sharply divided. Several senior leaders emphasised that while organisational efficiency is a valid topic of discussion, the RSS’s ideological position and historical associations make it incompatible with Congress values.

Pawan Khera, a senior Congress spokesperson, said unequivocally, “There’s nothing to learn from the RSS. What can an organisation known for Godse teach an organisation founded by Gandhi?” His remark reflected the historical and ideological sensitivities surrounding the RSS’s role in Indian politics and its association with the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi.

Congress leader Supriya Shrinate similarly emphasised the independence and historical legacy of the party. “BJP presents statements by twisting and distorting them. We have no need to learn anything from an organisation like the RSS,” she said. Shrinate highlighted that the Congress was a party that fought the freedom struggle against colonial rule and turned it into a mass movement. “People should learn from us,” she added, reinforcing the idea that the Congress sees itself as a repository of India’s democratic and social ideals.

Salman Khurshid, another senior Congress leader, echoed the sentiment: “We don’t have anything to learn from them. We oppose their ideology.” Khurshid’s comment reinforced the party’s position that any admiration for organisational skills cannot translate into an endorsement of the RSS’s political or ideological agenda.

Shashi Tharoor’s Position

While many leaders rejected the notion of learning from the RSS, Congress MP Shashi Tharoor offered a slightly different perspective, focusing on internal reform and the need for discipline within the party. Speaking to reporters, Tharoor said, “Even I want our organisation to strengthen. There should be discipline in our organisation. Digvijaya Singh can speak for himself.”

Tharoor’s remarks suggest an acknowledgment within Congress that organisational cohesion and strategic efficiency are areas requiring attention, without compromising the party’s core principles. By highlighting internal discipline, Tharoor drew attention to structural challenges that the party faces in translating its historical legacy into electoral success.

Digvijaya Singh Clarifies His Remarks

Facing criticism from both BJP and Congress quarters, Singh clarified that his comments were focused solely on organisational capacity and not on endorsing the RSS or BJP ideologies. “I’ve been saying this from the beginning. I am opposed to the ideology of the RSS. They neither respect the Constitution nor the country’s laws, and it is an unregistered organisation,” he told ANI news agency.

He went on to say that his admiration was purely for the structural effectiveness of the RSS. “I also admire their organisational capacity because an organisation that isn’t even registered has become so powerful that the Prime Minister says from the Red Fort that it is the world’s largest NGO,” Singh explained.

Singh further stressed that the Congress party, as a party of a movement, should focus on converting public support into electoral success. “The Congress party is fundamentally a party of a movement. I have said this many times that the Congress party is and should remain a party of a movement. But converting that movement into votes, that’s where we fall short,” he added, acknowledging internal challenges while defending his intention to discuss organisational learning.

Internal Dynamics and Implications

The episode underscores ongoing internal debates within the Congress over strategy, leadership, and reform. While the party has a storied legacy rooted in India’s freedom struggle and democratic ideals, its electoral performance over the last decade has often been inconsistent. Leaders like Digvijaya Singh and Shashi Tharoor appear to be advocating for introspection, emphasizing that structural efficiency and discipline can coexist with ideological fidelity.

At the same time, the criticism from other leaders highlights the delicate balance Congress must maintain between learning from rivals’ organisational practices and remaining ideologically distinct from parties with contrasting philosophies. The Godse-Gandhi reference, invoked by multiple leaders, reflects the deep historical and moral boundaries within which the party operates.

Political Repercussions

Singh’s remarks also provided fodder for the BJP to continue its narrative of a fractious Congress leadership. By juxtaposing the organisational discipline of the RSS with the Congress’s alleged internal divisions, the BJP has sought to portray its governance and party machinery as efficient and merit-based.

Meanwhile, within Congress, the incident may spark further conversations about how the party should modernize its organisational practices, manage internal dissent, and ensure that strategic discussions do not become politically damaging.

Conclusion

The controversy surrounding Digvijaya Singh’s comments reflects the broader tension in Indian politics between acknowledging structural efficiencies in rival parties and maintaining ideological clarity. While Singh intended to highlight the importance of organisational discipline, the historical baggage associated with the RSS elicited strong reactions from senior Congress leaders, reminding the public of the Godse-Gandhi legacy.

At the same time, voices like Shashi Tharoor’s indicate that introspection about internal reform, discipline, and organisational efficiency is not taboo within the party. The episode illustrates the complex balancing act that the Congress must perform: learning lessons from political adversaries while preserving its ideological identity and historical credibility.

As the debate unfolds, it remains clear that while organisational capacity is a critical factor in political success, ideological foundations, historical legacy, and ethical considerations continue to define how parties like the Congress navigate India’s competitive political landscape.