New Delhi, July 29, 2025: Leader of Opposition in Rajya Sabha Shri Mallikarjun Kharge- Speaking during the debate on Pahalgam terror attack and ‘Operation Sindoor’ in the Rajya Sabha, Shri Kharge referred to a series of terror attacks that took place in the last few years and said, “It is clear from all these incidents that there are repeated lapses in the country’s security. The Home Minister is responsible for these incidents. Accountability must be fixed, and he should resign from his position.”

He pointed out, the Union Home Minister during his visit to Jammu and Kashmir on April 7 and 8, had claimed that “due to the efforts of the Modi government, the anti-national terror ecosystem has been crippled.”

He said that just three days before the attack, Prime Minister Modi had canceled his scheduled visit to Kashmir. “I had asked about this earlier as well, but I haven’t received an answer to date. Was the government aware of any potential attack in advance?” he reiterated his question to the government, adding, if it was so, why were the tourists allowed to go there.

During the discussion in the Rajya Sabha, Shri Mallikarjun Kharge in his speech paid tribute to the people who lost their lives in the Pahalgam terror attack and expressed condolences to their families. He also mentioned the ‘Jai Hind’ Yatra organized by the Congress in support of the army and the resolution passed in the Congress Working Committee meeting, which emphasized the unity of the country.

Referring to Jammu and Kashmir Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha’s admission that the Pahalgam terror attack was a security lapse for which he took full responsibility, the Congress President observed - the responsibility should be taken by the Union Home Minister and not the Lieutenant Governor. He said, to cover up the Home Minister’s lapse and to shield him, the LG of Jammu and Kashmir had taken the blame upon himself.

Suggesting the lack of seriousness on part of the Prime Minister to address the issue immediately, he said, both he and the Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi wrote letters to PM Modi, urging him to convene a special session of the Parliament on the terror attack. He said that the PM did not even bother to reply to those letters, what to say about convening the special session. “A day will come when your arrogance will be shattered,” he told the PM in categorical terms.

Shri Mallikarjun Kharge pointed out, the Prime Minister did not even bother to attend the All-Party Meetings convened after the terror attack. “On April 24, the government called an All-Party meeting. The entire opposition was present at the meeting, but PM Modi did not attend”, he noted, while adding, as soon as he returned from Saudi Arabia, he went to hold a rally in Bihar. “Is this the seriousness of the PM towards national security?” he asked.

Shri Kharge raised serious questions on Prime Minister Modi’s silence on US President Trump’s claims of forcing a ceasefire by threatening trade. He asked that Pakistan surrendered after Indian Army’s retaliation, but who announced the ceasefire and from where? On what conditions was the ceasefire done and why was it accepted even after Pakistan was on the back foot? Did America interfere in this? Was this ceasefire done due to threat of trade? Why is Modi silent on Trump’s statement against the country’s honor? US President Trump also said that five jets have been shot down. Modi ji should answer this.

Shri Kharge stressed that no country, not even the US, had openly and clearly condemned Pakistan on the issue of terrorism sponsored by Pakistan. For the first time in history, the US President invited the Pakistani Army Chief to dinner at the White House. He also raised serious questions on the huge economic aid package given to Pakistan by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. He asked why did India not protest against it?

Drawing a parallel with how Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru handled the situation during Chinese aggression in 1962, he said, when the opposition demanded a debate, he (Pandit Nehru) welcomed it and said, let the people of the country know everything.

Shri P. Chidambaram (Tamil Nadu): Sir, I am glad that we are eventually discussing ‘Operation Sindoor’. Ever since ‘Operation Sindoor’ ended, we have been demanding that a special session of Parliament be called to discuss ‘Operation Sindoor’. But the Government, for reasons best known to it, refused to call a special session. All over the world, in every democratic country, where a war has taken place, even during the war, Parliament is in session. Example is the United Kingdom. And, certainly, after the war, the Parliament is convened to discuss various aspects of the war. If the subject is ‘India’s Strong, Successful and Decisive ‘Operation Sindoor’ in response to a terrorist attack in Pahalgam, there can be no quarrel with that subject. Whether ‘Operation Sindoor’ was decisive, only time will tell.

I am reminded of a decisive war. On December 16, 1971, there was a historic victory. General Niazi surrendered to General Jagjit Singh Arora, along with 93,000 soldiers. It was the largest surrender of Prisoners of War after the World War II. That was a decisive victory.

On the contrary, ‘Operation Sindoor’ ended with a ceasefire! I think the people of India know the difference between ‘surrender’ and ‘ceasefire’. The Government claimed, and it may be accepted, that India has destroyed terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan in nine places, -- we accepted -- and that India severely damaged 11 military airbases -- we accepted. But, why did India agree to a ceasefire? That is the question. Please remember that the Congress Working Committee was called after the Pahalgam attack and we extended unconditional and full support to the Government; so did the INDIA bloc parties. Nobody had any reservation in entrusting to the Government full authority, full power and full support to take whatever action it chose fit.

The Chief of Defence Staff admitted tactical mistakes. He also said that after the tactical mistakes, they paused, the military leaders got together and re-strategized. He admitted losses which is why I call the CDS and other military leaders and their leadership exemplary. I call them candid, forthright and transparent because he admitted tactical mistakes, re-strategized and admitted losses. The Deputy Chief of Army Staff admitted that Chinese aircraft had been deployed. He also admitted that Chinese missiles had been deployed. The only conclusion is, China was testing its military hardware in the India-Pakistan conflict. The Congress Working Committee which met later, pointed out that there was an intelligence and security failure.

But the Government has so far not acknowledged the security failure and the intelligence failure. Look at our neighbours. All our other neighbours are relatively peaceful. But, on the northern, western and eastern borders, we have Pakistan and China, and if they are fused in one front, that runs about 8,000 kilometers of border. Where is the thinking?

The 2006 Mumbai attack was by home-based terrorists; 2008 Mumbai attack was Pakistan infiltrated terrorism; 2011 terror attack was again home-based terrorism. So, terrorism does not divide by the border. There are infiltrated terrorists. There are home-based terrorists. Most of the time, they work together. If you claim that the terrorist ecosystem is being demolished, that is wrong. At the All-Party meeting on 24 April, 2025, the Home Ministry disclosed that between June, 2014 and May, 2024--that is the entire period of NDA Government, before and after, I will come to that--there were 1,643 terrorist incidents, 1,925 infiltration attempts, 726 successful infiltrations and 576 security personnel were killed.

I can have the data for the previous Government of UPA-1 and UPA-2, for the previous Government of Shri Vajpayeeji and the NDA Government. So, let us accept the fact the terror ecosystem has not been demolished. It will be difficult to demolish, but we can demolish.

There would be instructions from the Government to the DGMO, India. There would be instructions from Government of Pakistan to DGMO, Pakistan. They could not have spoken without instructions. They could not have agreed without instruction. And, after agreement, they could not have not reported to their respective Governments. Where is the record? Why has the hon. Prime Minister not rebutted Mr. Trump? That is the question.

That is how President Trump cannot be rebutted by this Government, because they don’t protest against Mr. Trump. Maybe they hope there will be ‘Ab ki baar, another Trump sarkar’. Fortunately, the Constitution of the United States doesn’t permit another Trump sarkar.