Is this the Congress party’s Mani Shankar Aiyar moment all over again? That seemed to be the Opposition party’s worry the moment the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) latched on to Shashi Tharoor’s “Hindu Pakistan” comment. On July 11, the Thiruvananthapuram Member of Parliament said to a Congress gathering in his constituency that if the BJP came to power, India could become a Hindu Pakistan, which would “enshrine the principle of Hindu Rashtra…will remove equality for the minorities”.

The BJP—which behaves as if it has copyright over the word “Hindu” and an allergy to the word “Pakistan”—went on the offensive, demanding an apology from Tharoor and his boss, Rahul Gandhi.

This is the standard template adopted by the BJP, deploying high decibel aggression through their spokespersons on friendly North Korean channels, who would further amplify the Tharoorism with their brand of hashtag journalism. Except that this is not the first time Tharoor has used this coinage. In fact, Sitaram Yechury had said the same in August 2017, in the Rajya Sabha. But in an election year, even a repeat can call for greater outrage. And a Congressi Tharoor is a bigger political target than Yechury.

The point is not so much about the right or wrong of what Tharoor said. The politics of today is unfortunately determined by how the Congress chooses to react. Randeep Surjewala was quick to say Congress leaders should choose their words carefully, hoping the party won’t become collateral damage. But then Tharoor is no office boy in the All India Congress Committee (AICC); he is a former Union minister, an MP, and one of the most articulate voices that the party has. The Congress squeamishness was an indication of a defensive approach, a fear that it has been ambushed once again.

It’s just like it was in the run-up to 2014 when Aiyar, arrogance personified, offered that Narendra Modi could set up a tea stall near the AICC session in New Delhi. In an atmosphere where the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance regime was seen to be represented by big-ticket corruption in the form of 2G, CWG, and Coalgate scams, this was seen as a crude example of the party’s disconnect with the masses. In one soundbite, the Congress, through Aiyar, had given 2014 on a platter to Modi, who never tires of emphasising his chaiwallah past. This faux pas resulted in Modi’s chai pe charcha, giving him an opportunity to connect to India over steaming tea.

Aiyar was to provide ammunition to Modi once again in the run-up to the Gujarat elections in November-December last year. Though not entirely Aiyar’s mistake, the PM chose to interpret the Congress leader’s comment in Pakistan that “unless Modi is removed, relations between India and Pakistan cannot improve”. Though Aiyar obviously meant a democratic removal through the process of elections, Modi interpreted it as giving “supari” to eliminate him. An acerbic Aiyar responded by calling Modi a “neech aadmi”. Again a wrong choice of words, as the BJP went to town, highlighting the Congress as a casteist party. All the Congress could do was suspend Aiyar from the party, hoping the disconnect will insure it from the leader’s foot-in-the-mouth tendencies.

Aiyar is not the only enfant terrible in the Congress camp. Before him, Digvijay Singh—with his penchant for tweeting and fondness for the television cameras—gave ammunition to the BJP with his remarks on “Hindu terror”. The Congress was never able to blunt the BJP campaign that in its endeavour to protect the Muslim community, it was seeking to paint the Hindus too with the colour of terror.

Why is the Congress on the defensive? Because it fears that comments like Tharoor’s have the potential of alienating the Hindu majority from the party. Pakistan—both as a geographical area and a sentiment—is anathema to most Indians, especially “proud” Hindus who believe the 56-inch policy of the Modi government is the right approach to the neighbour. So when Tharoor warns that BJP’s brand of Hindu majoritarianism or Hindu rashtra has the potential to convert India into a theocracy like Pakistan, many from the “Hindu khatre me hai” brigade, will froth at the mouth, and ask why not.

The BJP sees in this an opportunity to further polarise its Hindu vote bank to say the Congress is opposed to a state when the Hindu can assert himself. By asking Tharoor to apologise, the BJP is underlining its self-proclaimed status as the spokesperson for all Hindus in India. By not backing Tharoor, the Congress allows the BJP to get away with its narrative.

The reason the Congress is uncomfortable is because in Gujarat and Karnataka, it has sought to blunt the BJP’s Hindu card with its own soft Hindutva card. Tharoor’s assertion, it fears, could push the Hindu voter back into the BJP fold.

On the other hand, Tharoor’s ploy may well have been a trial balloon to reach out to that Hindu who has a more inclusive approach. Tharoor’s argument is that only 31 per cent of the 80 per cent Hindus voted for the BJP in 2014, which means a majority of the Hindu population does not subscribe to an approach that excludes. The problem is that this has not quite worked, as Sonia Gandhi herself admitted earlier this year that her party had been branded as a pro-Muslim party.

The fallout of the temple-hopping template adopted by Rahul Gandhi is that it has made the party suspect in the eyes of the Muslim electorate. At an interaction earlier this week with Muslim intellectuals, the Congress chief was reportedly quizzed about this approach that made the Muslim vote a non-factor in state elections. The danger is that this vote could migrate from the Congress to other regional players, if the Congress tries to play the BJP entirely in the Hindu zone.

What the Congress has exposed is its sense of confusion on what is the best argument to get the better of the BJP.