“Congress Proposes Catchy Alternative ‘BHARAT’ Amid India-Bharat Naming Controversy”
New Delhi: (India-Bharat naming controversy) Congress leader Shashi Tharoor took a swipe at the government today amid the India-Bharat naming controversy. He suggested that the opposition bloc could adopt the name “Alliance for Betterment, Harmony And Responsible Advancement for Tomorrow (BHARAT)” in response to what he referred to as the “pointless game of changing names” by the ruling party.
Tharoor’s comments came after President Droupadi Murmu sent out invitations for a G20 dinner, identifying her position as ‘President of Bharat’ instead of the customary ‘President of India.’ This move triggered a significant uproar among the opposition, who alleged that the Modi government was contemplating dropping ‘India’ in favor of ‘Bharat’ as the country’s name.
In a post on social media, Tharoor remarked, “We could, of course, adopt the name Alliance for Betterment, Harmony And Responsible Advancement for Tomorrow (BHARAT). Perhaps this would discourage the ruling party from this futile exercise of altering names.” The Congress is a part of the opposition Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance (INDIA).
On the same matter, Congress general secretary Jairam Ramesh stated, “Mr. Modi can continue to distort history and divide India, which is Bharat, a union of states. However, we will not be deterred. After all, what is the goal of INDIA (alliance) parties? It is BHARAT – Bring Harmony, Amity, Reconciliation, And Trust. BHARAT will prevail, and INDIA will succeed!”
Tharoor also mentioned on Tuesday that there is no constitutional objection to referring to India as ‘Bharat.’ Nevertheless, he expressed hope that the government would not completely abandon the use of ‘India,’ which holds significant brand value.
Additionally, Tharoor claimed that it was Pakistan’s founder, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, who had initially objected to the name ‘India,’ as it implied that “our country was the successor state to the British Raj and Pakistan a seceding state.”
