Raut highlighted a troubling inconsistency in Trump’s foreign policy posture, contrasting his intervention in South Asia with his firm support for Israel’s military operations in the Middle East.
MUMBAI — Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray) leader and Rajya Sabha MP Sanjay Raut has stirred political controversy with sensitive remarks linking the India-Pakistan ceasefire to alleged efforts to protect industrial interests in Gujarat.
In a televised interview on Sunday night, Raut questioned the legitimacy of the ceasefire announcement made by the US President Donald Trump and called it a “double standard” in handling international conflicts, citing US silence over Israel’s actions in Gaza.
Raut’s statement, made in both Hindi and Marathi, stirred a storm within the Mahayuti alliance in Maharashtra, with leaders from the BJP, NCP (Ajit Pawar faction), and Shiv Sena (Shinde faction) condemning him outrightly. Despite the backlash, his remarks are gaining traction on social media, with netizens debating the implications of foreign intervention in India’s military affairs.
Referring to the ceasefire between India and Pakistan, Raut asked pointedly, “Who is Donald Trump to stop a war between two sovereign nations?” He claimed that the ceasefire was prompted by concerns over a potential attack on Gujarat, where key industrial assets of prominent business figures are located.
“A drone was shot down in Haryana, coming from across the border. The army foiled the attack. After intelligence suggested another drone might target Gujarat, the Prime Minister allegedly requested Trump to call for a ceasefire to protect the property of his industrialist friends,” Raut claimed.
These assertions, while lacking concrete evidence, were presented by Raut as part of a broader critique of the Modi government’s foreign and defence policy, particularly in relation to American involvement.
Taking the argument further, Raut questioned Trump’s selective approach to peace mediation.
“If Trump could call a ceasefire between India and Pakistan, why is he not doing the same for Israel and Hamas?” Raut asked. “Why is he supporting Israel’s bombing of Gaza, where thousands of innocent women and children are being killed?”
Raut highlighted what he described as a troubling inconsistency in Trump’s foreign policy posture, contrasting his intervention in South Asia with his firm support for Israel’s military operations in the Middle East.
“He claims to want peace, but where is his peace agenda in Gaza?” asked Raut. “Why this double standard?”
Though his remarks have sparked outrage within the political establishment, Raut’s comments have opened up a wider debate online. Many users have questioned the legitimacy of Trump’s role in the Indo-Pak ceasefire and raised concerns over foreign interference in India’s strategic decisions.
Some commentators have also echoed Raut’s sentiments about American hypocrisy, pointing to Washington’s unconditional support for Israel amidst growing humanitarian concerns in Gaza.
Trump’s tweet about the Indo-Pak ceasefire at the time had already raised eyebrows, with critics arguing that it undermined India’s sovereignty. Raut’s revival of the issue has once again placed this controversy under the spotlight.
Beyond foreign affairs, Raut called for political accountability within India. Demanding the resignation of both Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah, accusing the government of failing to protect the country’s interests and compromising national security for corporate gain.
Raut also questioned the logic of agreeing to a ceasefire while “four militants involved in the Pahalgam attack remain unaccounted for.”
“These are serious national security lapses,” he said. “Instead of boasting about peace, the government should answer how it let terrorists escape and why it required American intervention to secure peace.”
Sanjay Raut has long been known for his outspoken nature, and this latest episode is not his first clash with the BJP-led government. However, political observers note that the intensity of his allegations this time has added a new dimension to the political discourse.
While many see his comments as reckless and inflammatory, others argue that they highlight critical concerns about foreign influence in India’s domestic affairs and the government’s close ties with select corporate entities.
Whether Raut’s claims have any basis remains unclear, but his statement has certainly ignited a political firestorm in Maharashtra and beyond.
As the debate rages on, it remains to be seen whether these allegations will be addressed with official clarification — or simply be dismissed as yet another episode in India’s highly charged political theatre.
