The alleged controversy regarding renaiming India to ‘Bharat’ is all about claims made by the Opposition. They say that the government is thinking about changing India’s name to ‘Bharat.’ This has sparked a big debate in politics.
Shashi Tharoor on controversy regarding renaming India to Bharat
Shashi Tharoor looked back to 2015 when the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) was involved in a legal case about naming India ‘Bharat.’ The MHA’s answer was clear: there was no good reason to change the name. Tharoor agreed with this and supported keeping the name ‘India.’
Constitutional provision recognizes both ‘Bharat’ and ‘India’ as official names for the country
The Constitution of India, in Article 1.1, officially recognizes both ‘Bharat’ and ‘India’ as names for the country. It states that “India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States.”
How G20 dinner related to this controversy?
The controversy got even more intense when invitations for a big G20 dinner arrived. These invitations said ‘President of Bharat’ instead of the usual ‘President of India.’ This small change caused a big political argument, with some people thinking the government wanted to replace ‘India’ with ‘Bharat.’
Historical context : Shashi Tharoor provided
To explain his point of view, Shashi Tharoor goes back in time. He talks about how Pakistan’s founder, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, didn’t like the name ‘India’ during the time of partition. Jinnah believed that ‘India’ made it sound like the country was just continuing the British rule, while Pakistan was a separate new nation.
Shashi Tharoor connect issue to the views of Mohammad Ali Jinnah
Shashi Tharoor suggests that by wanting to rename India to ‘Bharat,’ the government might be unintentionally agreeing with Mohammad Ali Jinnah’s old views. He uses this connection to make a strong political statement about the government’s stance.
Shashi Tharoor hope to emphasize by mentioning Mohammad Ali Jinnah’s objection to the name ‘India’
Shashi Tharoor’s goal in bringing up Mohammad Ali Jinnah’s objections is to show that the government’s position aligns with historical disagreements from the time of partition. He wants to highlight this alignment and express his disagreement with it.
In his final message, Shashi Tharoor strikes a balance. He agrees that there’s nothing wrong with using ‘Bharat’ as a name for India. But he strongly hopes that the government won’t completely abandon the well-known name ‘India.’ He thinks ‘India’ is like a valuable brand with a rich history and global recognition. And he leaves us with the thought that the government’s current position unintentionally echoes the historical objections raised by Mohammad Ali Jinnah during the time of partition. This is Shashi Tharoor’s complex message about the debate over naming India.