Salman Khurshid says nothing wrong in calling Narendra Modi 'impotent', meant 'administrative incompetence'

New Delhi: Union Minister Salman Khurshid today said he had not crossed a line by describing Narendra Modi as "impotent" for his handling of the 2002 Gujarat riots, insisting that he meant "administrative incompetence" but it was too mild in this case.

"What is personal about it? I am happy to use another word. I can say he is incompetent but it is not enough to describe the mayhem in Gujarat in 2002," Mr Khurshid told NDTV, asserting that he saw no reason to apologise.

Yesterday, while addressing a gathering in his Lok Sabha constituency Farukkhabad in Uttar Pradesh, the minister said, without naming Mr Modi, "You claim to be such a strong and powerful man and wish to be the PM, and you could not protect the people of Godhra... Are you not a strong man? Our allegation is not that you get people killed, but that you are napunsak (impotent)."

The BJP has demanded an apology from the minister. "The whole world is criticizing him but he is unrepentant. Let Salman Khurshid remember that abuses always boomerang," said BJP leader Prakash Javadekar, facing off with the minister on NDTV.

Asked if he expected a censure from Rahul Gandhi, who had advised party men to avoid personal comments, Mr Khurshid said, "I will be very happy if my leader decides that I have crossed the red line...But my leader knows better English, and Hindi, than the BJP. Give me one single word that expresses my anguish...in English, Hindi or any other language."

Advertisement

Rahul Gandhi's advice followed Congress leader Mani Shankar Aiyar's comment last month mocking Mr Modi's tea-seller past. (read: Mani Shankar Aiyar refuses to apologise for comments on Modi)

Earlier today, Mr Gandhi's comment at an interaction in a school in Assam did seem to carry a message for Mr Khurshid, "When politicians speak with hatred, it is going to harm you."

Advertisement

Mr Modi's critics say he did not do enough to stop the riots in his state 14 years ago but recently, the Supreme Court said it could find no evidence to prosecute the Chief Minister.