Kiren Rijiju Clarifies PM Modi’s ‘Dimagi Naxal’ Remark Was Not Aimed at Opposition Leaders

Union Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju on Sunday issued a clarification on Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s use of the term “Dimagi Naxals” during the Independence Day address. Rijiju stated that the phrase was not directed at opposition leaders and outlined the specific groups to which he said the term applied. The remarks have sparked a political exchange between the government and the opposition following the Prime Minister’s speech from the Red Fort.

Rijiju’s clarification came a day after Modi said that while armed Naxalism was nearing its end in the jungles, its ideological sympathisers were looking for opportunities to create unrest in the country. (PTI) | The Indian Express

Context of the Independence Day Address

Prime Minister Modi delivered his address from the ramparts of the Red Fort on 15 August 2026, marking the 80th anniversary of India’s Independence. In the speech he said the government had succeeded in weakening armed Naxalism and that Maoist violence no longer possessed the strength to sustain itself in regions once affected by the insurgency. He recalled that Naxalism had held large parts of the country in its grip for nearly four decades, operating through the barrel of a gun and resulting in the deaths of more than 3,500 police and security personnel. Areas that had earlier witnessed violence, he noted, now saw the tricolour of development, trust and effort flying high.

The Prime Minister then distinguished between armed Naxals and what he described as ideological or “dimagi” Naxalism. He claimed that people with a Maoist mindset had for years occupied spaces within the corridors of power and had influenced policies even while serving as advisers on government committees. While the armed threat in the forests had been largely eliminated, he said, ideological Naxalism continued to look for opportunities to promote violence and anarchy and to pull society in the wrong direction. He called for such elements to be identified and isolated so that the country’s youth could be aligned with the effort to build a developed nation.

Rijiju’s Clarification on the Term

A day after the speech, Kiren Rijiju addressed the controversy in a post on X. He stated that the Prime Minister had not described opposition leaders as Dimagi Naxals. According to Rijiju, the term applied only to three categories of people: those who support Maoists and reject the Indian Constitution; those who stand with separatists and support Article 370; and those who seek to cut the “chicken neck” corridor in order to separate the North-East from the rest of India.

Rijiju also shared a video clip of a speech by jailed student activist Sharjeel Imam in which Imam had spoken of cutting off Assam from the rest of the country through the Siliguri Corridor, commonly known as the chicken’s neck. The minister presented this as an illustration of the third category he had listed. In a subsequent post he described a statement by senior Congress leader P. Chidambaram as “very unfortunate and highly damaging,” while again emphasising that the Prime Minister’s remarks had not been directed at opposition leaders.

Opposition Response

Senior Congress leader and former Union Home Minister P. Chidambaram responded to the Prime Minister’s speech by posting on X that he was “proud to be a dimagi naxal.” Congress general secretary Jairam Ramesh criticised the language used in the address, saying the Prime Minister had earlier referred to opponents as “urban naxals” and had now shifted to the term “dimaagi naxals.” Ramesh described the remarks as a sign of desperation and claimed that the Prime Minister often ended up adopting positions advocated by those he labelled in this manner.

The exchange has intensified debate around the characterisation of ideological challenges to national security and constitutional order in public discourse. Rijiju’s intervention sought to draw a clear distinction between the groups he identified and elected opposition leaders.

The MGMM Outlook 

Kiren Rijiju’s clarification makes it clear that Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s reference to “Dimagi Naxals” was not aimed at opposition leaders as a political category, but at individuals and groups whose positions, according to the government, support Maoist ideology, separatism or attempts to undermine India’s territorial integrity. The clarification is important because the opposition’s immediate attempt to portray the remark as an attack on political rivals risks diverting attention from the larger issue raised by the Prime Minister: the ideological networks and narratives that can continue to influence society even after armed Naxalism has been substantially weakened. The government’s distinction between political opposition and activities perceived as threatening national unity should therefore be considered before drawing political conclusions from the speech.

The reaction from Congress leaders, particularly P. Chidambaram’s statement expressing pride in being a “dimagi naxal,” has further intensified the controversy rather than addressing the substance of the Prime Minister’s warning. Opposition leaders are free to criticise the government, but turning a national-security discussion into a political confrontation can obscure the distinction between legitimate dissent and support for separatist or extremist causes. At a time when India has made significant progress in reducing left-wing extremism, the focus should remain on protecting constitutional institutions, national unity and the country’s territorial integrity. Rijiju’s clarification provides a necessary context to the Prime Minister’s remarks and challenges the opposition’s attempt to present them simply as another attack on political opponents.

(Sources: News18, The Indian Express, Moneycontrol)