‘Imagined Words’: Chidambaram Slams PM Modi’s Remarks on 26/11 Att
News THE ECONOMIC TIMES, livelaw.in, LAW, LAWYERS NEAR ME, LAWYERS NEAR BY ME, LIVE LAW, THE TIMES OF INDIA, HINDUSTAN TIMES, the indian express, LIVE LAW .IN
Former Home Minister P. Chidambaram accuses PM Modi of misquoting and fabricating comments on the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks; BJP defends Modi and counters with a political jibe.
New Delhi — Thursday, October 9, 2025
‘Imagined Words’: Chidambaram Slams PM Modi’s Remarks on 26/11 Attacks; BJP Hits Back
A fresh political storm has erupted after senior Congress leader and former Home Minister P. Chidambaram accused Prime Minister Narendra Modi of attributing “imagined words” to him over his remarks on the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks. The exchange has reignited an old debate over how the UPA government handled India’s most devastating terror assault and how the episode continues to shape India’s national security and political legacy.
The controversy began after PM Modi, during a recent address, claimed that a senior Congress leader — referring to Chidambaram — had said that India’s armed forces were ready to retaliate against Pakistan after the 26/11 attacks, but the then government stopped them “under pressure from a foreign country.”
PM Modi’s Remarks Trigger Political Firestorm
Speaking at a public event earlier this week, PM Modi criticized the Congress-led UPA government for what he called a “weak and hesitant” response to the 2008 Mumbai attacks. Modi claimed that Chidambaram’s own statements revealed that India was poised for retaliation, but Congress “bowed to international pressure.”
“A senior Congress leader who was Home Minister has said the armed forces were ready to strike after 26/11,” Modi said. “But Congress stopped them under pressure from foreign powers. The people of India must know — who stopped our forces from avenging the deaths of innocent citizens?”
The remarks drew immediate attention across political and media circles, with the BJP defending Modi’s comments as a “legitimate question about accountability,” while the Congress dismissed them as “political mischief.”
Chidambaram’s Rebuttal: ‘Imagined Words and Misquote’
Responding sharply, P. Chidambaram accused PM Modi of misquoting him and twisting his words for political gain. In a detailed post on X (formerly Twitter), the Congress veteran wrote:
“The Hon’ble Prime Minister has imagined words and attributed them to me. His statement is wrong — terribly wrong. I never said that the armed forces were ready and that the government stopped them under pressure. These are imagined words.”
Chidambaram clarified that while military options were discussed after the 26/11 attacks, the decision not to launch immediate retaliation was taken after careful diplomatic and strategic evaluation. He recalled that then-U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had visited New Delhi to urge restraint and avoid escalation that could destabilize the region.
“The UPA government’s response was guided by national interest, global diplomacy, and measured strength — not weakness,” Chidambaram said. “We acted responsibly, not recklessly.”
He also described Modi’s remarks as part of a “political attempt to rewrite history” and warned that the politicization of terror diminishes the seriousness of India’s national security discourse.
BJP Hits Back: ‘Congress Owes the Nation Answers’
The BJP swiftly countered Chidambaram’s remarks, standing firmly by PM Modi’s version of events. Party leaders accused the Congress of evading responsibility and questioned its “failure to act decisively” after the 26/11 terror attacks.
BJP spokesperson Sambit Patra said that Congress’s leadership, including Sonia Gandhi, needed to explain why India chose diplomatic restraint instead of a retaliatory strike when the nation was mourning one of the darkest days in its history.
“Chidambaram may deny his words, but the Congress can’t hide behind semantics,” Patra said. “History remembers how the UPA government hesitated when Pakistan-based terrorists waged war on Indian soil. The BJP stands with the victims, not the perpetrators.”
Other party leaders amplified the attack, arguing that Modi’s remarks reflect the frustration of millions of citizens who felt India’s response after 26/11 was “timid and reactive.”
Congress Defends Chidambaram, Accuses BJP of ‘Distortion’
The Congress Party, meanwhile, rallied behind Chidambaram. Senior Congress leader Jairam Ramesh described Modi’s statements as “deliberate distortion” and accused the Prime Minister of misrepresenting facts to score political points ahead of upcoming elections.
“This is a clear case of political manipulation,” Ramesh said. “PM Modi has a habit of twisting past events to fit his narrative. The UPA’s response after 26/11 was measured, diplomatic, and responsible.”
Congress spokesperson Supriya Shrinate echoed similar views, stating that Modi’s comments reveal a pattern of “manufactured political rhetoric” and that the Prime Minister should “stop invoking national tragedies for political mileage.”
The 26/11 Legacy and India’s National Security Debate
The 26/11 Mumbai attacks remain a painful chapter in India’s collective memory — 166 lives lost, 300 injured, and a nation traumatized. For years, the event has symbolized both India’s vulnerability and its resilience.
This new controversy underscores how the attacks continue to shape India’s national security politics and legacy debates. Modi’s government has often contrasted its “surgical strike” and Balakot airstrike responses with the UPA’s perceived restraint post-26/11, portraying the BJP as stronger on counterterrorism and national security.
Chidambaram’s rebuttal, meanwhile, seeks to reclaim the narrative — presenting the UPA as responsible actors in a complex geopolitical environment rather than weak policymakers.
Political analysts note that such debates are part of a larger “legacy politics” — where both parties compete to define the meaning of historical crises to bolster their credibility on security and governance.
“Every government faces the dilemma of retaliation versus restraint,” said Dr. Ananya Menon, political analyst at ORF. “Modi is reframing history to highlight BJP’s assertive stance, while Chidambaram is protecting Congress’s diplomatic legacy. Both are shaping India’s memory of 26/11.”
Beyond Politics: Lessons for National Security
Experts warn that while political sparring is inevitable, it should not cloud the real lessons from 26/11 — the need for intelligence reform, border vigilance, and global cooperation against terrorism.
“National security shouldn’t be reduced to partisan politics,” said former RAW official B.K. Sharma. “Both governments — UPA and NDA — have faced terror challenges. The focus should be on strengthening systems, not scoring points.”
Nevertheless, the renewed debate signals how deeply the 26/11 attacks continue to influence India’s national identity, political memory, and leadership image.
Political Fallout and Election Undercurrents
With general elections looming, political observers believe the exchange between Modi and Chidambaram could influence campaign narratives. BJP strategists are likely to emphasize the “strong vs. weak” leadership contrast, while Congress will push back against what it calls “historical revisionism.”
Whether voters see Modi’s remarks as legitimate criticism or opportunistic rhetoric remains to be seen. What is clear is that even after 17 years, 26/11 continues to echo — as a tragedy, a lesson, and now, a political weapon.
Source:
