Owaisi Slams Modi Government: 'How Can You Play Cricket with Pakistan After Pahalgam?'

When Asaduddin Owaisi stood up in the Lok Sabha on July 28, 2025, he didn’t just ask questions—he shattered the silence around India’s response to the Pahalgam terror attack. His voice cracked with emotion, not just anger. "मैडम, मेरा जमीर तो गवारा नहीं करता कि मैं उस मैच को देखूंगा," he said. Madam, my conscience won’t let me watch that match. The room went still. No applause. No murmurs. Just the weight of 25 dead civilians in Pahalgam, and a government still inviting Pakistan to play cricket.

"Enter and Stay," Not Just Enter and Kill

Owaisi, the six-term MP from Hyderabad and president of All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM), didn’t mince words. He challenged Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s administration on the moral logic of continuing cultural ties with Pakistan after the July 2025 massacre at the Hindu pilgrimage site. "You block 80% of Pakistan’s water," he asked, "you launch Operation Sindoor—and yet you let their players step onto Indian soil for a match? What kind of deterrence is that?" He referenced the chilling phrase used by militants: "Not just enter and kill—enter and stay." It wasn’t just about retaliation, he argued. It was about the absence of a coherent strategy. Operation Sindoor, described by the government as "strong, successful, and decisive," had struck back at terror infrastructure. But Owaisi asked: Did it change anything? Did it make the next attack less likely?

Water, Cricket, and the Weight of Conscience

The most haunting part of his speech wasn’t the political jabs—it was the personal. Owaisi spoke of the 25 families in Pahalgam who lost sons, fathers, brothers. "Can your conscience allow you to sit and watch a cricket match while their blood is still fresh?" he demanded. He drew a parallel to India’s own water policy: withholding 80% of the Indus waters under the Indus Waters Treaty, yet still allowing Pakistan to compete in a sport that unites millions across borders.

"You cut off their water," he said, "but you still let them play? That’s not strength. That’s confusion. That’s moral surrender." He invoked historical figures too—French President Charles de Gaulle, who rejected U.S. pressure during the Algerian war, and former Indian Prime Minister I.K. Gujral, known for his policy of unilateral goodwill toward neighbors. "Gujral Sahab had courage," Owaisi said. "He didn’t wait for permission to do what was right." The implication was clear: India’s leadership, in his view, had lost its moral compass.

Opposition Echoes: Rajeev Rai and the PoK Question

Owaisi wasn’t alone. Rajeev Rai, a Samajwadi Party MP, took aim at BJP’s Anurag Thakur, who had claimed Operation Sindoor had "set the stage" for reclaiming Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). Rai called it empty rhetoric. "The whole country hoped," he said. "They believed the government would finally act. Then came Trump’s statement—suddenly, PoK is off the table?" He accused Thakur of deflecting blame. "They have no answer for why PoK wasn’t taken back. So they talk about Operation Sindoor. But the people want more than slogans. They want results." The exchange exposed a deeper fracture: the gap between nationalist rhetoric and tangible security outcomes. Operation Sindoor, while militarily precise, had not altered the strategic reality on the ground. Pakistan still controls PoK. Terror networks still operate from its soil. And the civilian death toll in India keeps rising.

What Happened Next? The Government’s Silence

The Lok Sabha adjourned at 7:23 PM IST on July 28, 2025, leaving the government’s response pending. Union Home Minister Amit Shah was scheduled to speak on July 29 at 12:00 PM IST, followed by Prime Minister Modi in the evening. But by early morning on July 29, no official statement had addressed Owaisi’s core questions.

Meanwhile, social media exploded. A tweet by Mukarram Ali Siddiqui quoting Owaisi’s line about conscience went viral, amassing over 1.2 million views in 12 hours. Hashtags like #OwaisiSpeaks and #ConscienceOverCricket trended across India. Even some BJP supporters admitted privately: "He’s right. How do you celebrate a victory and then shake hands with the enemy?" The government’s silence spoke volumes. They had launched a military operation. But they hadn’t yet built a narrative that matched its gravity.

Why This Matters Beyond Politics

This isn’t just about cricket or water. It’s about how a nation defines justice after trauma. When 25 civilians are killed in a sacred place, the public expects more than surgical strikes. They expect accountability. They expect consistency. They expect leaders who can explain why peace is still possible with a state that continues to sponsor terror.

Owaisi’s speech forced India to confront an uncomfortable truth: we can strike hard, but if we don’t change how we think, we’ll keep fighting the same war. The Pahalgam attack wasn’t an anomaly. It was the latest in a pattern. And until the government answers how it plans to break that pattern, the anger won’t fade.

India’s deterrence policy, as Owaisi asked, failed—not because it lacked strength, but because it lacked clarity. And clarity requires more than force. It requires moral courage.