Karnataka Congress president B.K. Hariprasad’s description of Umar Khalid as a “nationalist” has triggered sharp criticism from the BJP and ABVP.
The controversy emerged during a dispute over a proposed documentary screening at Bengaluru’s National Law School of India University (NLSIU). Hariprasad criticised ABVP and questioned its authority to oppose the documentary.
Responding to the statement, ABVP leader Abhinandan Mirji questioned how Congress could describe Khalid as a nationalist while opponents associate him with the 2016 JNU controversy, Afzal Guru-related events and allegations linked to the 2020 Delhi riots case.
BJP Questions Congress’ National Security Position
The BJP has accused Congress leaders of politically legitimising figures whose activities and statements have generated serious national-security concerns.
The central BJP criticism is that Congress leaders should not issue patriotic credentials to controversial individuals without addressing the allegations raised against them.
The BJP has also criticised Karnataka minister Priyank Kharge after he questioned the continued detention of Umar Khalid and challenged the central government to proceed with his trial.
The Political Question
The controversy raises a direct question for Congress leadership:
Why does Congress describe Umar Khalid as a “nationalist” instead of clearly addressing the allegations and controversies associated with him?
Nationalist groups, including the BJP and ABVP, have strongly criticised Congress leaders for describing Umar Khalid as a “nationalist.”
They questioned Congress’ position on national security and argued that political leaders should address the serious allegations and controversies associated with Khalid rather than publicly defending him.
The nationalist criticism has intensified the political debate over Congress’ approach to nationalism, public order and national security.