- 13 hours ago
A showdown between BJP and Congress escalated over Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi’s attempt to quote from an unpublished memoir by former Army Chief General M.M. Naravane in Lok Sabha.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Okay, let's raise the big questions tonight.
00:03Why was Rahul Gandhi stopped from quoting General Narawne's unpublished book?
00:09Is Rahul Gandhi not following parliament rules?
00:12Or does the Modi government have something to hide on China?
00:16Is there a need for greater transparency on the India-China border standoff?
00:22Or does it involve national security?
00:25Joining us now, our special guest, Lieutenant General S.L. Narsimann,
00:29Defence Analyst joins us.
00:31Jyoti Mani, Senni Malai, is Congress Lok Sabha MP.
00:34Aparajita Sarangi, Senior BJP Lok Sabha MP.
00:38Javed Ansari, Senior Journalist, is also with us.
00:42I appreciate all of you joining us.
00:44I want to get you Aparajita Sarangi first.
00:46Please tell me, why not allow Rahul Gandhi,
00:51when he's quoting from an article,
00:54to say what he wants and then the government can rebut every claim of Rahul Gandhi?
00:58Why was there a reluctance to even allow Rahul Gandhi to speak?
01:06A very good evening.
01:08The budget session had just begun.
01:11And the entire day today was lost.
01:15And all of us, MPs from all over the country were inside the Lok Sabha
01:21and it was such a condemnable spectacle, I must say.
01:25See, when we are in the Lok Sabha,
01:28we are guided by the rules of procedure and conduct of business in the Lok Sabha.
01:32We are bound by the rules.
01:34We may like it, we may not like it.
01:36But we have to follow the directions of the Honourable Speaker.
01:41I will be talking about two rules from this particular book,
01:45which I have in my hand, if all of you can see.
01:49This is for all to see this.
01:51Yes.
01:52You know, one is, of course, the 349 rule,
01:55which everybody talked of today.
01:57But I will not read out that rule.
01:58I will be taking just 30 seconds to read out rule number 353
02:04and then I will be talking about other issues.
02:07See, 353 rule says,
02:10please allow me to read out,
02:13provided that the Speaker may at any time prohibit any member
02:17from making any such allegation,
02:19if the Speaker is of the opinion that such allegation is derogatory
02:23to the dignity of the House
02:25or that no public interest is served by making such allegation.
02:30Now, it's for the Speaker to decide
02:33and we are all bound by the directions of the Speaker.
02:36This is one part.
02:38Now, the number two part,
02:39we may not like, we may not like,
02:41but the fact remains that the matters of national security
02:45sometimes cannot be discussed even on the floor of the Lok Sabha.
02:49We cannot discuss certain issues
02:51pertaining to our relations with a couple of countries.
02:55Ma'am, sorry.
02:55We do not.
02:56Ma'am, can I know what is the rule?
03:00What is the rule which says that matters of national security cannot be debated?
03:05We've had,
03:06there were debates on the Sino-Indian war in 1962 in Parliament,
03:10famously where Vajpayee ji spoke, Nehru ji spoke.
03:13Why is it that now you can't speak on it?
03:15What is the rule that stops you from speaking on national security, ma'am?
03:18Well, see, there are sensitive matters.
03:22There are sensitive matters which the government feels are sensitive, cannot be discussed.
03:28You may like it, I may not like it.
03:30But then, you know, if the Speaker decides should not be discussed, will not be discussed.
03:35This is one part.
03:36And number two, let me ask you,
03:38Rahul Gandhiji did stand up and did cry hoarse.
03:43I'm not saying no to that.
03:44But then, what was the name of the book that he mentioned?
03:48Please take the video of today's speeches of Rahul Gandhiji,
03:51whatever bits and pieces he spoke to us in.
03:54In fact, there was no mention of the book.
03:57This was definitely an unpublished book,
04:01which we did not know about.
04:03We don't know the name.
04:05Never ever Rahul Gandhiji mentioned the name of the book.
04:08So, I think, as far as the Congress Party is concerned,
04:14I would call them, please excuse me,
04:16they are habitual offenders.
04:18When Uri strike took place,
04:19when Balakot took place,
04:21they tried everything to ask us,
04:24where is the proof?
04:25So, they bring down the morale of the army.
04:27And this is how they do.
04:28This is what they do.
04:29We have to accept what they have been doing all through.
04:32So, I think this was very unfortunate what happened today.
04:35This should not have happened.
04:36Ma'am, I have heard you very carefully.
04:42Aparajita Sarangi, I have heard you carefully.
04:45Why are we standing there?
04:47Okay, let the Congress have equal chance.
04:50This is not Parliament here.
04:51I would like to give everyone equal chance.
04:53Jyoti Mani, please respond to what Aparajita Sarangi says.
04:57She says, she's quoted rule 353,
05:00which says, matters of a defamatory nature cannot be raised in this manner,
05:05without giving adequate notice A.
05:07B, she says, there are sensitive matters of national security,
05:10that cannot be discussed in Parliament.
05:12Your response?
05:12See, there is no such rule, as you rightly mentioned,
05:20preventing Raghuul Gandhiji, leader of opposition,
05:23or any member of the Parliament,
05:25preventing from discussing about the national security, first thing.
05:28Second thing, this is nothing to be sensitive,
05:30because this has been done a few years back.
05:34See, what was done a few years back?
05:38No, no, no, what was done a few years back?
05:40Please be specific.
05:41No, no, what was done a few years back, ma'am?
05:44I'm just coming, I'm just coming, I'm just,
05:46I'm just coming to the point.
05:48Actually, in 2020, August 31st,
05:52in Kailash range,
05:54Chinese PLA army,
05:57has tanks advancing towards our territory.
06:01Then, by...
06:03Madam...
06:04By the command, Mr. Josie,
06:07called then army chief.
06:09Hello?
06:10No, no, madam, you are...
06:11No, no, madam, I...
06:12No, no, I am asking you a simple question.
06:14Inform then army chief.
06:16No, no, no, madam,
06:16let me finish.
06:17No, no, madam, you must answer my question.
06:19According to the BJP,
06:21matters of national security
06:23that are defamatory to their leaders
06:25cannot be raised in Parliament.
06:30There is no such thing,
06:31as you rightly said,
06:3262, there was a very clear,
06:34very long discussion,
06:36everybody, both the opposition
06:37and the...
06:38Dushri Penji has spoken,
06:39Nehruji has replied.
06:40Then again, actually,
06:42Indiraji,
06:42when we had a war with Pakistan
06:44to liberate Bangladesh,
06:46the same parliament had the discussion.
06:48The rule is same for even then
06:50and even now.
06:51But problem with the BJP is,
06:53BJP will take up the rule
06:54when it suits their narrative.
06:56In the same parliament,
06:57just before Rahulji has started speaking,
06:59Mr. Tejasvi Surya,
07:01who actually quoted his own research paper
07:03and made the defamatory allegation
07:05against the Congress party.
07:06Then where were the BJP with that rule book?
07:08Where was Mr. Speaker with that rule book?
07:10Nobody was there
07:11because it's a wild allegation
07:13against the Congress party.
07:15But when Rahulji rightly quoted a...
07:17Tejasvi Surya quoted,
07:19he quoted previous president's address.
07:22Rahul Gandhi has quoted
07:23an unpublished memoir,
07:25except of which has been carried
07:26in a magazine.
07:27No, no, listen, listen.
07:31No, no, Rajdeep Ji.
07:32Actually, some part of his speech,
07:34he said, actually,
07:35I have done a research.
07:37The research shows that
07:38you can go back and see this thing.
07:40And not only Tejasvi Surya Ji,
07:42there are many people,
07:43including the prime minister,
07:44had made many allegations
07:46against the Congress party.
07:47This is very simple.
07:48Rahulji has said,
07:49not quoting the book.
07:50There was a caravan magazine
07:51who carried some text of the books.
07:54Even at some point,
07:55Rahulji said,
07:56okay, I am not even quoting the magazine.
07:57Let me speak about the national security
07:59and how the prime minister of this country
08:01failed the nation
08:03and failed the military leadership
08:04because he is not able to
08:07decision in a decisive moment.
08:09He let the military leadership
08:11to take their own call
08:13and he abdicated
08:14his own responsibility.
08:15This is shameful.
08:16This is shocking.
08:18He let down
08:18not only military leadership,
08:19he let down the country
08:20when our military has
08:23our military leadership
08:25has making very frantic calls
08:27to the leadership of this country.
08:28Okay, I am going to stop both
08:30and Mr. Jyothi Mani
08:31and Mr. Ajit Oval.
08:33But where were their guts?
08:35Actually,
08:35they have failed them
08:36because they are covered
08:37but I will come to the specifics.
08:38Ma'am, I will come to the specifics.
08:41If you take it, it won't call.
08:43Okay, I want to go to,
08:44you know, since rules are being quoted,
08:46critical to this,
08:48can a leader
08:49quote from an unpublished memoir,
08:51excerpts of which
08:52are carried in a magazine?
08:54Can he do that?
08:55No one better to answer that
08:57than PDT Achari.
08:58I will come to my other guests
08:59in a moment.
08:59PDT Achari
09:00spoke to me earlier.
09:02He is former Secretary General
09:03of Lok Sabha.
09:04Thank you very much,
09:05Mr. Achari,
09:06for joining me.
09:07Now, Rule 349,
09:08which is being quoted,
09:09says,
09:09and I want to quote,
09:11shall not read any book,
09:13newspaper or letter
09:14except in connection
09:15with business of the house.
09:17Shall not distribute literature,
09:19questionnaire, pamphlets
09:20not connected
09:21with business of house.
09:22Did Rahul Gandhi,
09:23in your view,
09:24violate any parliamentary norms
09:26by trying to read out
09:27unpublished excerpts
09:28of General Naravne's book
09:31which has come out
09:32in a magazine?
09:36Actually, you know,
09:38this rule says
09:41that a member
09:43shall not read newspaper,
09:47article or book
09:48unless it is in connection
09:50with the business of the house.
09:52You know,
09:52that is also very important.
09:54Unless it is in connection
09:56with business of the house.
09:58Now, what exactly
09:59is the business of the house?
10:01The business of the house
10:01is the discussion
10:02on motion of thanks.
10:03motion of thanks.
10:07Discussion on motion of thanks
10:08is discussion
10:09on the matters
10:10raised by the president
10:12in her address.
10:14So,
10:16the president's address,
10:17you know,
10:18covers a whole spectrum
10:19of issues
10:20which the government
10:21deals with.
10:23National,
10:23international,
10:24and all that,
10:25and also legislative matters.
10:27Now, here,
10:29the question is
10:30whether Rahul Gandhi
10:31was quoting a paper
10:34which is totally
10:35unrelated to
10:36the business of the house.
10:39Now,
10:39this rule
10:39implies
10:40that a member
10:42can raise,
10:44a member can quote
10:45a paper
10:45or book
10:46or whatever
10:47if it is related
10:48to the business
10:49of the house.
10:50That is what
10:51this rule implies.
10:52So,
10:52you are saying
10:53Rahul Gandhi
10:54can quote
10:55a paper
10:55if it is related
10:56to the business
10:57of the house
10:58in this particular case
10:59since it is based
11:00on an unpublished book.
11:02Does that make
11:02any difference
11:03at all,
11:03Mr. Achari?
11:06No.
11:07It is,
11:07he was not reading
11:08the book.
11:09He was reading
11:09an article.
11:10He was quoting
11:11an article
11:11which of course
11:13contains excerpts
11:13from that book
11:14maybe.
11:15The point is
11:16in the house
11:17physically
11:18he was quoting
11:19from an article
11:20which he can do
11:22but the only condition
11:24is that he has
11:24to authenticate it.
11:27He has to authenticate
11:28whatever he quotes
11:29in the house
11:29and he can lay it
11:31on the table
11:31of the house.
11:33So, Rahul Gandhi,
11:34let me get this clear.
11:35He has to authenticate it
11:37or will General Naravune
11:39have to say
11:40publicly,
11:41yes,
11:42I stand by
11:42what I say
11:43or the magazine.
11:45How do you
11:45authenticate something
11:46that is unpublished
11:48and an excerpt
11:48has been carried?
11:49Is it for Rahul Gandhi?
11:51Who has to authenticate it?
11:54Mr. Rahul Gandhi
11:55when he raises
11:56this issue
11:57or when he quotes
11:58from a paper
11:59he has to authenticate
12:01he has to say
12:02that I stand by this
12:03I have verified
12:04the veracity of this
12:05and I stand by
12:07whatever is contained
12:08in this article.
12:10That is the thing.
12:12So,
12:12that is his responsibility.
12:14He must have checked
12:14with those people
12:15and he should
12:16as a member of parliament
12:17who makes a statement
12:19in the house
12:19with all sense and responsibility
12:21he has to
12:22find out from
12:24either the caravan
12:26or from Mr. Naravune
12:27whether this is right
12:29or not
12:29because he is going
12:30to raise it in parliament.
12:31And in your view sir
12:33is this connected
12:33with the business
12:34of the house
12:35the president's address
12:36an excerpt
12:37of this kind
12:38which the government
12:38says has sensitive
12:39national security information
12:41involving India
12:42and China
12:42in your view
12:43can it be interpreted
12:44that it is connected
12:46with the business
12:46of the house
12:47the president's address?
12:50The president's address
12:51naturally
12:52mentions about
12:55our relations
12:56with our neighbouring countries
12:58our relations
12:59with the countries
13:00far and wide
13:01all these things
13:02must be there
13:03so there must be
13:04some mention
13:05about
13:05the India-China
13:07relationship
13:07so
13:09a mention
13:10about this
13:11particular incident
13:12whatever it is
13:13it comes
13:14under that
13:15So let me get
13:17this very clear
13:17Rahul Gandhi
13:18in your view
13:19can quote
13:20from an article
13:21can quote
13:22even from
13:22an unpublished book
13:23all he has to do
13:24is authenticate it
13:25prove that the article
13:26is genuine
13:27and if he does that
13:28he has every right
13:30to put it out
13:30am I correct?
13:33He doesn't have
13:34to prove anything
13:35he has to merely say
13:36that
13:37I am authenticating it
13:39because I have
13:40verified the truth
13:42contained in this
13:43and I stand by that
13:44that's enough
13:45that statement
13:45is enough
13:46and the speaker
13:47then thereafter
13:48will allow him
13:50because there are
13:51empty number of cases
13:52where the speakers
13:52have decided
13:53that the member
13:54has to merely
13:55authenticate it
13:56he must stand by it
13:58But sir
13:59in this case
14:00the speaker
14:00did not allow him
14:01to speak
14:02Rahul
14:03can Rahul Gandhi
14:04still
14:04is it the speaker's
14:06prerogative
14:06is his word
14:07final to decide
14:08if Rahul Gandhi
14:08can speak about
14:09this issue or not?
14:13Speakers is final
14:14the speaker's word
14:14is final
14:15you can't do
14:16anything about it
14:17you can't challenge
14:17the speaker's ruling
14:18whatever it is
14:19whether it is
14:20right or wrong
14:21but the speaker's
14:22ruling is the final
14:23okay so we've got
14:24two clips
14:25speaker's ruling is
14:26final
14:26but you believe
14:28prima facie
14:29that Rahul Gandhi
14:30can quote from a
14:31magazine
14:32even if it's an
14:33unpublished memoir
14:34PDT Achari
14:35they're clarifying the
14:36position
14:36thank you very much
14:37I want to now
14:38come to you
14:39Lieutenant General
14:39Narasimhan
14:40then I'll come back
14:41to the politician
14:41because General
14:42Narasimhan
14:42what this involves
14:44is a book
14:45a memoir
14:46wherein
14:47General Narasimhan
14:49in one particular
14:50passage
14:51according to the
14:51excerpt that has
14:52been carried
14:53has referred
14:54to the fact
14:55that the
14:56political leadership
14:57did not take
14:58a decision
14:58on whether
14:59to fire
15:00on Chinese
15:01tanks
15:01that were
15:02coming
15:02at the time
15:04at the end
15:05of August
15:05left the decision
15:06to the military
15:07leadership
15:08this can be
15:09interpreted
15:09by some
15:10as a sign
15:11of indecision
15:12do you believe
15:13that rather
15:14than not
15:15allow this
15:15to come out
15:16in the public
15:17domain
15:17this should
15:19be debated
15:19in parliament
15:20or not
15:21do you believe
15:21really that
15:22this is as
15:22sensitive as
15:23it is being
15:24made out to be
15:24thank you Rajdeep
15:27for getting me
15:28on your show
15:28I'm not going
15:30to comment on
15:31the political
15:31issue of this
15:32whether it is
15:33allowed or not
15:33allowed in the
15:34parliament
15:34I think the
15:35general secretary
15:35was clear
15:36about it
15:36what I'm going
15:38to comment on
15:38is the
15:39I read that
15:4047 pages
15:40of that
15:41caravan article
15:41which has
15:42come out
15:42that is one
15:43the thing
15:44is that
15:45it says
15:45that is a
15:48message that
15:49I think
15:49it's quoted
15:50in the
15:50caravan
15:51whatever you
15:52feel right
15:53you can do
15:54that's what
15:56Rajnath Singh
15:57just to tell
15:57our viewers
15:58that's what
15:58Rajnath Singh
15:59told general
16:00Naravne
16:00when Naravne
16:01rang him up
16:02finally the
16:03decision
16:03whatever you
16:04want to do
16:05you can do
16:05yeah
16:07so that
16:08left with
16:09left with
16:09general Naravne
16:10the decision
16:11as to how
16:12to handle
16:12that particular
16:13situation
16:13it can be
16:14seen in two
16:15ways
16:15the way
16:16that has
16:16been projected
16:17in the
16:17parliament
16:18today
16:18that it
16:19is an
16:19abdication
16:20of responsibility
16:21the other
16:22way you
16:22can say
16:23it is that
16:23I am giving
16:24you the
16:24full power
16:24you go
16:25and do
16:25what you
16:25want
16:26I will
16:26back you
16:26up
16:26so these
16:27two connotations
16:28can be
16:29taken
16:29I would
16:30prefer
16:30I would
16:31prefer to
16:31take the
16:31connotation
16:32of you
16:32know
16:33you do
16:33whatever
16:34militarily
16:34you need
16:35to do
16:35and we
16:36will have
16:36your back
16:37that is
16:37the kind
16:37of message
16:38probably
16:38I would
16:39read from
16:40this
16:40so I
16:44what I
16:45want to
16:45understand
16:46from you
16:46very clearly
16:48is
16:49what I
16:52want to
16:53understand
16:53from you
16:54in your
16:54view
16:54should this
16:56issue be
16:56debated
16:57or not
16:57in parliament
16:58see that
17:00that is a
17:00matter of
17:01the rules
17:01I
17:01listen to
17:02the entire
17:02no no
17:03forget the
17:04rules sir
17:04I am now
17:05asking you
17:06as a
17:06defence
17:06person
17:07forget the
17:07parliament
17:08rules
17:08do you
17:09believe
17:09that we
17:10know enough
17:11about what
17:11happened in
17:122020 that
17:13summer in
17:14Galwan after
17:16what happened
17:16in Galwan
17:17is there
17:17anything if
17:18this because
17:18the memoir
17:19is unpublished
17:20do you
17:21believe that
17:21the defence
17:22ministry is
17:22being unnecessarily
17:24sensitive and
17:25bureaucratic should
17:25this memoir be
17:26published or
17:27not in your
17:28view
17:28I don't
17:29think so
17:30the thing
17:30that I
17:31think we
17:31need to
17:31keep in
17:32mind is
17:32that there
17:32is a
17:33statement
17:33that has
17:34been made
17:34by Mr.
17:34Jaishankar
17:35in the
17:35parliament
17:36there is a
17:36statement
17:37which have
17:37been made
17:37by Mr.
17:38Rajnath
17:38saying in
17:38the parliament
17:39earlier
17:39I don't
17:40think anything
17:41new has
17:41come out
17:42in this
17:42and so
17:43far so
17:44much has
17:44been written
17:44about the
17:45Kalwan incident
17:46in the last
17:46five to six
17:47years I don't
17:48think anything
17:48new is coming
17:49out here
17:49so then why
17:51should Rahul
17:52Gandhi be
17:52stopped from
17:53speaking then
17:54all the
17:55more he
17:55should be
17:56allowed to
17:56speak all
17:56the more
17:57the book
17:57should be
17:57published
17:58if there
17:59is nothing
17:59new
18:00the book
18:01publishing
18:01is left
18:02to the
18:02people who
18:03have to
18:03do the
18:05corrections
18:05to it
18:06I am
18:06not again
18:07privy to
18:07what was
18:08stopping
18:08that book
18:09from being
18:09public
18:10the second
18:11thing is
18:11in the
18:11parliament
18:12I heard
18:12that the
18:12entire 47
18:13minutes of
18:13the exchanges
18:14so there
18:15are certain
18:16rule positions
18:16in the
18:17parliament
18:17which has
18:17been quoted
18:18the opposition
18:19leader was
18:20saying something
18:20different
18:21so there
18:21was some
18:22decision that
18:23was being
18:23given by the
18:23speaker
18:24I don't
18:25think we
18:25are contesting
18:25that here
18:26at this
18:26point in
18:27time
18:27because the
18:27general
18:27secretary of
18:28the Lok Sabha
18:29mentioned that
18:29speaker's word
18:30is final
18:30I am now
18:34going to turn
18:35to Javed
18:35Ansari
18:36Javed
18:36Ansari
18:36the politics
18:38of it all
18:38Rahul Gandhi
18:40seems to want
18:40to use these
18:41opportunities to
18:42target the
18:43Modi government
18:44to suggest
18:44that he
18:44is not a
18:4656 inch
18:47chest
18:47that's what
18:48he said
18:48when he
18:49came out
18:49of parliament
18:50suggesting that
18:51for all this
18:51nationalistic
18:52bombast
18:53the truth
18:53is this
18:54government
18:54doesn't want
18:55to be open
18:56and transparent
18:57about what
18:58happened on
18:59the border
18:59with China
19:00do you believe
19:01that Rahul
19:01Gandhi's
19:02approach is
19:04the right
19:04one
19:04do you
19:05believe that
19:06this kind
19:07of adversarial
19:08approach is
19:09working for
19:09him or not
19:10working for
19:11him
19:12Rajdeep
19:14take out
19:16the individuals
19:17in the
19:17question
19:18purely
19:19speaking
19:21objectively
19:21everybody
19:22has a
19:23right
19:23each and
19:24every member
19:25of parliament
19:26in the
19:27opposition
19:27has a
19:28right to
19:29haul the
19:29government
19:29including the
19:31prime minister
19:31of the day
19:32over the
19:33course
19:33so therefore
19:34as far as
19:35that principle
19:35is concerned
19:36I'm absolutely
19:37clear in my
19:38mind
19:38I'm also
19:39absolutely
19:39clear in my
19:40mind
19:40that the
19:41government
19:42overreacted
19:43if there is
19:44nothing to
19:44fear
19:44the reason
19:45why the
19:46government
19:46did it
19:47is that
19:48Mr.
19:49Modi and
19:50this government
19:50have been
19:51owning up
19:51all the
19:52other military
19:54adventures that
19:54India has
19:55undertaken
19:55whether it's
19:56Balakot
19:56Uri
19:57Pulwama
19:58whatever
19:58you know
19:59Mr.
20:00Modi said
20:00I gave
20:00permission
20:01to go
20:01carry out
20:02this air
20:02attack
20:03even under
20:03their clouds
20:04etc
20:04now this
20:05is the
20:06first one
20:06which
20:07it set
20:07as image
20:08which seems
20:09to cast
20:09some kind
20:10of doubt
20:10that they
20:11were not
20:11as decisive
20:12as they
20:13in their
20:15decision making
20:16as they
20:16would want
20:17the nation
20:17to believe
20:18and we've
20:19seen in the
20:20past also
20:20this government
20:21is very
20:22uncomfortable
20:23with even
20:24an iota
20:24of criticism
20:25whether it
20:26is from
20:26the leader
20:27of the
20:27opposition
20:27or from
20:28people sitting
20:29on the
20:30outside
20:30okay
20:31you want
20:32to respond
20:33to that
20:33Aparajita
20:34Sarangi
20:35that the
20:35Modi
20:35government
20:36wants to
20:36take credit
20:37whenever
20:38for example
20:39it believes
20:40it's carried
20:40out a
20:41successful
20:41military
20:42operation
20:42and then
20:43when it
20:43comes to
20:44China
20:44for all
20:46the talk
20:46of
20:46lal aank
20:47the government
20:48tends to be
20:48a little bit
20:49more cautious
20:50therefore if
20:50Rahul Gandhi
20:51wants to
20:51speak out
20:52and claim
20:52that the
20:52government
20:53was indecisive
20:54why not
20:56just refute
20:56him in
20:57parliament
20:58in a
20:58debate
20:58rather than
20:59stopping
20:59him from
21:00speaking
21:00what is
21:01the government
21:02trying to
21:02hide
21:02if it has
21:03nothing to
21:03hide
21:04ma'am
21:04many thanks
21:09Raji for
21:09this debate
21:10in fact
21:12it was
21:12great hearing
21:13all the
21:13panelists
21:14and things
21:16are clear
21:16before us
21:17see
21:17parliament
21:18is run
21:19by rules
21:20and we
21:21cannot violate
21:21the rules
21:22otherwise
21:23there would
21:23be mayhem
21:24inside
21:24Lok Sabha
21:25and the
21:25Rajya Sabha
21:26now let
21:27let me
21:27tell you
21:27whatever
21:28we have
21:28been
21:29talking
21:29about
21:29is
21:30rule
21:31349-1
21:32we cannot
21:33violate
21:34rule
21:34349-1
21:35there has
21:37to be
21:37reading out
21:38of paper
21:38newspaper
21:39etc
21:39in connection
21:41with business
21:41in the house
21:42and the
21:43business in the
21:44house
21:44we know
21:44what it
21:45was
21:45her
21:47excellency
21:47honourable
21:48president
21:48delivered
21:49an address
21:50to both
21:51the houses
21:51of parliament
21:52on 28th
21:53and then
21:53there was
21:54motion of
21:54thanks
21:55going on
21:55she had
21:56listed out
21:57the achievements
21:58of this
21:59government
21:59under her
22:00and the
22:01debate
22:02had to be
22:03centred
22:03around that
22:04let me tell
22:05you very
22:05frankly
22:05very candidly
22:06and the
22:07debate
22:08could not
22:08have gone
22:09to
22:09indo-china
22:10war
22:10indo-pakistan
22:11war
22:11because there
22:12was hardly
22:13any mention
22:13of indo-china
22:14war
22:14in her
22:15speech
22:16so I
22:16think
22:17there was
22:17a mention
22:17of national
22:18security
22:18there was
22:19a mention
22:20that we
22:20are a
22:20strong
22:21nation
22:21national
22:22security
22:22there was
22:23no specific
22:23mention
22:24of china
22:24but there
22:25was a
22:25mention
22:25of
22:25strong
22:26nation
22:26I
22:30agree
22:30I agree
22:31but there
22:32are sensitive
22:32matters
22:33as I told
22:34you I
22:34reiterate
22:35we may
22:35like it
22:36we may
22:36not like
22:36it
22:37but even
22:38MPs like
22:39us
22:39MPs from
22:40the ruling
22:40party also
22:41we cannot
22:42actually talk
22:42about issues
22:43which are
22:44sensitive
22:44for the
22:45nation
22:46we cannot
22:46talk
22:47in an
22:48often
22:48manner
22:49about
22:49such
22:49issues
22:50and here
22:50was an
22:51issue
22:51which had
22:51been
22:52raised
22:52out of
22:53an article
22:54which was
22:55not published
22:55and we
22:56don't even
22:56know the
22:57name of
22:57the book
22:57which had
22:58to see
22:58the light
22:59of the
22:59day
22:59no no
23:00ma'am
23:01the good
23:01news
23:02the officer
23:03the ex
23:04officer
23:04ma'am
23:05I have
23:05the book
23:06here
23:06no no
23:07I have
23:07the book
23:08because the
23:08book was
23:09put out
23:09by Penguin
23:10Penguin
23:10was going
23:11to publish
23:11the book
23:12in December
23:122023
23:13and it
23:14backed
23:14out at
23:14the last
23:15moment
23:15and then
23:16the book
23:16was sent
23:17to a
23:17defense
23:18review
23:18committee
23:18the name
23:19of the
23:19book is
23:20four stars
23:21of destiny
23:21general
23:22Manoj
23:23Mukun
23:23Naravne
23:23so the
23:24book was
23:25to be
23:25published
23:25in fact
23:26if you
23:26go to
23:26Amazon
23:27you can
23:28still see
23:28the cover
23:28of the
23:29book
23:29there
23:29so I
23:30mean
23:30the fact
23:31is the
23:31book was
23:31going to
23:32be published
23:32ma'am
23:33and last
23:33minute
23:34the government
23:34did not
23:35allow
23:35give permission
23:36for the book
23:36to be published
23:37so my
23:37point is
23:38my point
23:41is why
23:42didn't Rahul
23:42mention the
23:43name of the
23:44book as
23:44you did
23:45now he
23:46never
23:46mentioned
23:46the name
23:47of the
23:47book let
23:48me tell
23:48you it
23:49was some
23:49chit that
23:49had come
23:50to him
23:50and he
23:51just spoke
23:51on the
23:52basis of
23:52that chit
23:52that chit
23:53of paper
23:54so I
23:54think we
23:56are going
23:56by the
23:56rule tomorrow
23:57also the
23:58rule will
23:59prevail and I
23:59think all
24:00of us
24:00should welcome
24:00that
24:01okay you
24:01know the
24:02point
24:02therefore
24:03Jyoti
24:03Mani is
24:04as PDT
24:05Achari
24:05told me
24:06speaker's
24:06word is
24:07final
24:07at the
24:08end of
24:08the day
24:09speaker is
24:09like the
24:10umpire
24:10you have
24:10to accept
24:11it you
24:11may not
24:11like it
24:12but you
24:13have to
24:13accept it
24:14now the
24:14Rahul Gandhi
24:15seems to
24:16believe I
24:16will not
24:16accept the
24:17speaker's
24:17view
24:17speaker said
24:18you cannot
24:18speak about
24:19this book
24:19yet every
24:20time Rahul
24:21Gandhi
24:21got up he
24:21spoke about
24:22it
24:22what does
24:23that say
24:24does Rahul
24:24Gandhi
24:24have no
24:25faith in
24:25Om Birla
24:26please say
24:26it
24:27if you
24:27believe Rahul
24:28Gandhi
24:28believes Om
24:29Birla is
24:29not a
24:30neutral
24:30umpire
24:31say it
24:31but he is
24:33the speaker
24:36now Rajdeep
24:40Ji before
24:40coming to
24:41your question
24:41I would
24:42like to
24:42address on
24:43what Mr.
24:44Narasimhan
24:44Ji has
24:44said with
24:45due respect
24:46I would
24:46like to
24:47differ from
24:47him it's
24:48not that
24:49actually
24:49government
24:49very clearly
24:50said actually
24:51you can go
24:52ahead we
24:53will pack
24:54you up that
24:54was not
24:55there if you
24:56allow me for
24:56a few seconds
24:57I will read
24:58from that
24:58caravan magazine
24:59do whatever
25:02you deem
25:03appropriate this
25:04was to be
25:04purely a
25:05military decision
25:06Modi had
25:06been consulted
25:07he had
25:08been briefed
25:09but he had
25:09declined to
25:10make the
25:10call I
25:11had been
25:11handed a
25:12hot potato
25:13it was a
25:14moment of
25:14profound
25:15isolation
25:16so that's
25:17what Mr.
25:18Narawane has
25:18clearly said
25:19so that means
25:20actually it's
25:21not the
25:21political leadership
25:22especially the
25:23prime minister
25:24was not
25:25ready to
25:26stand by the
25:26military leadership
25:28whatever they
25:29decide
25:30so that's
25:30precisely the
25:31problem
25:31because
25:32Modi ji
25:32does not
25:33want to
25:33take any
25:34decision
25:34because he
25:35put the
25:37sole power
25:38on the
25:38military
25:38leadership
25:39I must be
25:40fair that is
25:40an interpretation
25:41that you have
25:42every right to
25:43make my
25:43limited point
25:44once the
25:45speaker has
25:46decided who
25:47is the
25:47who is going
25:48to who is
25:48the umpire of
25:49the parliament
25:50Rahul Gandhi or
25:51the speaker
25:52I am coming
25:56to that point
25:57Rajiv ji
26:00because unfortunately
26:01the honourable
26:02speaker of the
26:03house
26:03every time
26:04let down
26:05us
26:05especially the
26:06apportion
26:06the house
26:07belongs to us
26:08also
26:08today I have
26:10seen in front
26:10of my eyes
26:11the honourable
26:12prime minister
26:12has indicated
26:13when Rahul ji
26:14started speaking
26:15he was not
26:15speaking
26:16he was started
26:17speaking
26:17he indicated
26:19something to the
26:20home minister
26:20then Rajina Singh ji
26:21stood and
26:22started stopping
26:23Rahul ji
26:24then speaker
26:25again allowed
26:26Rahul ji to
26:26speak
26:27then both
26:28of them
26:28both the
26:29defence minister
26:30and the
26:30home minister
26:31pressurized
26:32literally the
26:32speaker
26:33then speaker
26:34succumbed to
26:34the government
26:35pressure
26:35that is very
26:36very unfortunate
26:36you are making
26:37a very serious
26:38allegation
26:38you are claiming
26:39own birla succumb
26:41he let down
26:41the parliament
26:42he let down
26:43the very parliament
26:44he is going to
26:45protect
26:46that is very
26:46very unfortunate
26:47you know that is
26:48a very serious
26:49allegation you have
26:50made
26:50you have all seen
26:51this was a live
26:53it was a live
26:55it was live
26:56telecast
26:56the country has
26:57seen it
26:57how Mr.
26:58Om Birlaji
26:59has let down
27:00the parliament
27:00forget about the
27:01congress party
27:02or our leader
27:02of opposition
27:03he let down
27:03the parliament
27:04what is wrong
27:05in discuss
27:06the national security
27:06it is not
27:07sensitive
27:07what is sensitive
27:09to PJP
27:10is the prime
27:10minister Modi's
27:1156 inch image
27:13is completely
27:13exploded today
27:14by Rahul ji's
27:15because Rahul ji
27:16clearly said
27:17actually he is not
27:18quoting the book
27:19because he is about
27:19to start speaking
27:20before he started
27:21speaking
27:22because just
27:23he mentioned
27:23the name of
27:24the army chief
27:25Rajna Singh
27:25stood up
27:26and stopping
27:27Rahul ji
27:27because Rajna Singh
27:28knows what is
27:29in the book
27:30because as you
27:30rightly said
27:31the book is
27:32lying in the
27:32defense ministry
27:33they are not
27:33allowing army chief
27:35to publish a book
27:36because they will
27:37get exposed
27:38that's what we
27:38want to precisely
27:39say
27:40either in the
27:41parliament
27:41or before the
27:42media
27:43so Jyoti Maniji
27:44I have heard
27:44you
27:44I have heard
27:45all my speakers
27:46I want to give
27:46my take at the
27:47moment
27:48before that
27:49if general
27:49Narsiman is still
27:50with us
27:50do you believe
27:51a retired army
27:52chief's book
27:53should be stopped
27:54like this
27:54just a quick
27:55word on that
27:55why not allow
27:57it to be published
27:57do you believe
27:58that an army
27:59chief
27:59distinguished
28:00man of
28:01integrity
28:01shouldn't his
28:02book be published
28:03let the public
28:04decide
28:04let the readers
28:05decide
28:06you see
28:08Mr. Rajiv
28:09you need to
28:10keep in mind
28:11Henderson Brooks
28:13report was made
28:13in 1962
28:14after the
28:15India-China war
28:17it has still
28:18not been
28:18declassified
28:19why has it
28:20not been
28:20declassified
28:21after say
28:2238 plus
28:2363 years
28:24so there are
28:25certain things
28:26which are
28:27supposed to be
28:27kept confidential
28:28and we don't
28:30know why
28:31that book is
28:31not getting
28:32published
28:32because we
28:33don't know
28:33the contents
28:33of the book
28:34we have not
28:35read it
28:35so we
28:36can't
28:36comment
28:37whether
28:37that book
28:38should be
28:38allowed to
28:38be published
28:39not allowed
28:39to be published
28:40that is a
28:41matter of
28:41an official
28:42official decision
28:43that needs
28:43to be taken
28:44okay
28:45I'm going
28:45to leave
28:46it there
28:46I want
28:47to give
28:48my take
28:48as I
28:49thank my
28:49guests
28:49the showdown
28:51in parliament
28:51only reveals
28:53the complete
28:54breakdown in
28:55relations between
28:56the Modi
28:56government and
28:57the opposition
28:57congress in
28:58particular
28:59since Rahul
29:00Gandhi was
29:00quoting from
29:01a published
29:02article of
29:02an unpublished
29:03book
29:03he should
29:04have been
29:05allowed to
29:05authenticate it
29:06and then make
29:07his point
29:07the government
29:08then also has
29:09every right to
29:10rebut Rahul
29:11Gandhi's claims
29:11but unfortunately
29:13such is the
29:13hostility that
29:14both sides have
29:15for each other
29:16that the cut and
29:17thrust of a
29:18parliament debate
29:18is now tangled
29:20in ego wars
29:21and mistrust
29:22while concerns
29:23over national
29:23security are
29:24legitimate
29:25it doesn't
29:26imply that the
29:26Sino-Indian
29:27border issue
29:28cannot be discussed
29:29in public fora
29:30particularly when
29:31a retired
29:32distinguished
29:32army chief
29:33is writing
29:34about it
29:35more than
29:36five years
29:36after the
29:37Galwan clashes
29:38the nation
29:39is none the
29:40wiser on
29:41what really
29:41happened on
29:42the border
29:43in 2020
29:43information
29:44control may
29:45work in a
29:46country like
29:47China with
29:48an authoritarian
29:49regime
29:49in India a
29:51democracy like
29:52ours we
29:52should be
29:53treasuring our
29:54open society
29:55we should not
29:57have anything
29:58really to
29:59hide that's
30:01my take
Comments