Javed Akhtar Voices Shame Over India’s Reception of Taliban Minister
Poet, lyricist and screenwriter Javed Akhtar sparked a heated debate by condemning the reception accorded to Taliban Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi during his visit to New Delhi. Akhtar’s comments, posted on X, framed the gesture as a contradiction to India’s declared stance against terrorism and its own democratic values.
Context: Muttaqi’s Visit and India’s Shifting Ties
Muttaqi, who is in India on a six-day, high-profile visit, marked the first such trip by a Taliban leader since the group seized control of Afghanistan in 2021. New Delhi has signaled a nuanced approach to bilateral relations, aiming to balance regional security interests with diplomatic engagement. Akhtar’s critique underscored a broader unease about how India should engage with a government framed by many as extremist.
Akhtar’s Critique and the Deoband Controversy
In his post on X, Akhtar wrote that he hangs his head in shame when he sees the “worst terrorist group” being treated with respect by Indians who otherwise condemn terrorism. He also targeted Darul Uloom Deoband in Saharanpur, Uttar Pradesh, accusing the influential seminary of giving Muttaqi a reverent welcome. Akhtar’s remarks reflect a larger debate about whether cultural or religious institutions should participate in diplomacy with regimes that many view as hostile to women’s education and basic freedoms.
Political Reactions: A Polarized Narrative
Mehbooba Mufti, PDP chief, joined the conversation by criticizing the BJP-led government for what she described as hypocrisy: embracing Taliban while criticizing Muslims at home. Mufti argued that India, as a democracy, must reconcile its international aims with the rights and safety of its own Muslim population, who have long contributed to national identity and progress. Her comments illustrate the tension between strategic diplomacy and domestic social cohesion.
The Broader Implications for India-Afghanistan Relations
Despite internal debates, India has reinforced its intent to sustain ties with Afghanistan, including offering scholarships and aid for reconstruction. Analysts note that such engagement could be strategic, given regional security dynamics and the need to support humanitarian and educational initiatives for Afghan students. However, the approach also raises questions about the messaging and standards a democracy should uphold when engaging with actors widely labeled as terrorists by others.
Media Coverage and Public Discourse
The controversy surrounding Muttaqi’s press briefing, which reportedly lacked women journalists, intensified scrutiny of how media access is managed during high-profile visits. Critics argued that inclusive press sessions are essential to a transparent diplomacy, while supporters contended that security and protocol considerations must be weighed. The incident amplified conversations about gender representation in journalism and governance across South Asia.
Conclusion: Balancing Values with Strategic Interests
The debate sparked by Akhtar’s remarks and Mufti’s response highlights a central tension in contemporary politics: how democracies should engage with regimes that challenge core freedoms. As India navigates its regional commitments and domestic diversity, the question remains how to uphold universal rights while pursuing pragmatic foreign policy goals.
