On Thursday, February 13, Congress MP Manickam Tagore submitted a notice in the Lok Sabha to propose an adjournment motion, seeking a discussion on the relaxation of “National Security Protocols” for the Khavda Renewable Energy Project in Gujarat, located near the India-Pakistan border.
In his notice, Tagore highlighted that the Khavda Renewable Energy Park, developed by the Adani Group, is merely one kilometer from the sensitive India-Pakistan border in the Rann of Kutch—an area with a history of conflicts between the two nations.
He further alleged that the Modi government disregarded security concerns and overruled military officials to push the project forward.
“The government went so far as to create exceptions for this project, and potentially others, near India’s borders with Pakistan, China, Nepal, Myanmar, and Bangladesh. This is a direct assault on the integrity of military advice and national security protocols. The Modi government’s cronyism, with its clear favouritism toward the Adani Group, is a threat to the sovereignty of our nation. The decision to award such a high-risk project to Adani raises severe concerns about conflicts of interest and transparency in governance,” he said.
The claims made by Congress are indeed concerning—not because of what they assert, but because Congress has repeatedly accused the BJP government of neglecting India's military interests for years. However, the entire nation understands that this claim lacks credibility, especially coming from Congress, as generations of Indians have seen firsthand how committed Congress was to India's military and strategic interests.
Is Congress Taking Orders from London?
The Congress party’s adjournment motion comes a day after the British news portal The Guardian, which has often been criticized for its anti-India stance, published an ‘exclusive’ article filled with speculation, unnamed sources, and gossip. The article attempts to paint the Khavda solar energy plant—set to be the world’s largest renewable energy plant—in a negative light.
The Guardian claims that the plant is problematic because it is located “close to the Pakistan border” and is being developed by Adani. While there is no substantial evidence to back up the allegations against Adani, the article suggests an issue simply by associating the company with the project, with the implication that the public should trust their narrative on which companies and political parties are deemed "good" or "bad" without any proof.
The article, titled “Tycoon profited after India relaxed border security rules for energy park,” was written by Hannah Ellis Petersen and Ravi Nair. It makes numerous unsubstantiated claims and insinuations. One of these is that the Adani Group was “charged” by a US attorney, though it fails to mention that the attorney’s motivations were questionable, given his political affiliations, and that the case itself was weak. This raises doubts about why a US court would engage in a smear campaign against an Indian energy conglomerate.
Petersen has a history of anti-India and anti-Hindu activism, according to reports from OpIndia. Nair is linked with the OCCRP, a left-leaning organization funded by George Soros and USAID, which has previously targeted Adani and expressed clear political bias against the Modi government, particularly when it comes to large infrastructure projects that bolster India’s energy security.
The Guardian claims to have information that security protocols were modified for the Khavda project but fails to clarify what the actual concern is. Why is it an issue for a country to adjust its protocols in order to allow a significant infrastructure project in a desert region that’s sparsely populated and unsuitable for farming or other activities? It’s India’s land, so why shouldn’t it benefit from a major solar project?
The article also mentions that the Gujarat government coordinated with the central government and the Ministry of Defence to clear the project. This might seem surprising, as state governments in India are often slow to approve infrastructure projects, sometimes taking years or even decades. The efficiency in this case is noteworthy, though it seems to have upset Congress.
The main concern raised by The Guardian and the so-called “military experts” is that the Khavda plant is located just a kilometer away from the Pakistan border in some places. They argue that it is problematic to develop infrastructure so close to a hostile nation’s border.
Should We Leave the Border Area Barren and Undeveloped?
Leaving border regions undeveloped and desolate has cost India significantly over the years. These areas need robust infrastructure, including better roads and connectivity, and a nation aiming for rapid growth to meet the needs of 1.4 billion people urgently requires energy projects. The Khavda energy plant, once fully developed, is set to produce 30 gigawatts of clean energy—enough to power a small country.
This project will supply electricity to millions of homes. Social initiatives by the Adani Group are already helping the surrounding villages, which once had limited opportunities for livelihood and progress. The group is supporting schools and working closely with local communities to boost economic development. However, both Congress and The Guardian argue that India should not pursue it, citing its proximity to the Pakistan border.
The hybrid solar and wind energy park in Khavda is expected to begin operations this year and will also power Google’s cloud services and operations in India. Upon completion and full operation, the plant will generate 81 billion units of clean energy annually, enough to power 16 million households—more than the combined number of homes in Poland and Canada. Additionally, the plant is set to create 15,200 green jobs.
In today’s world, securing energy independence is as much a military strategy as investing in tanks and weapons. The Rann of Kutch, mostly barren desert land, should not be left undeveloped. Claiming that India should avoid infrastructure projects in such regions is absurd. The people in these areas deserve to benefit from national progress, and every part of India should have access to connectivity and sustainable development. This not only strengthens the country but also ensures our safety against neighboring threats.
Congress’s neglect of India’s border areas for decades left these villages without essential roads, schools, and livelihood opportunities. Whether it’s the Rann of Kutch, Jammu and Kashmir, Jaisalmer, Ladakh, or North East India, developing infrastructure and connectivity is not just beneficial; it’s a vital strategic necessity in today’s world.
Better roads, mobility, and technological connectivity in border regions improve military operations during conflict and send a powerful message to adversaries—these areas are not neglected and cannot be trespassed at will. Well-developed border villages show the enemy that “we are watching your every move.”
Common sense dictates that a state-of-the-art energy plant supplying power to millions and to companies like Google will be protected with top-tier security systems, surveillance technology, and personnel. For The Guardian and Congress to claim that the world’s largest green energy project presents a ‘security risk’ is not only childish but misleading and designed to stir unnecessary fear among the public.
Congress and Its Persistent Trend of ‘Foreign’ Uproar in Parliament
Congress has a long-standing tendency to disrupt parliamentary proceedings by fixating on trivial, irrelevant, and baseless issues. Despite facing repeated electoral defeats and rejections by the Indian public, the party still fails to understand that the purpose of Parliament is to deliberate on matters of genuine national concern, not to stage theatrics for the approval of their Western patrons.
At the start of the budget session, PM Modi took a jab at Congress and the Opposition, remarking that, for the first time since 2014, a Parliament session was beginning without a ‘foreign spark’ instigating disruption. His comment directly pointed to Congress’s habit of seizing on ‘foreign-origin’ narratives to manufacture outrage.
Time and again, Congress sidesteps critical national issues, instead choosing to amplify controversies concocted by foreign publications or Western organizations. Whether it was Pegasus, Rafale, Hindenburg, or their latest manufactured controversy, the party appears to be on an endless mission to squander Parliament’s time on baseless distractions.
Comments