Agartala, 27th August 2026 : ‘A political controversy surrounding a CPI(M) programme commemorating Fidel Castro’s birth anniversary overshadowed the opening day of the monsoon session of the Tripura Legislative Assembly on Thursday, with Parliamentary Affairs Minister Ratan Lal Nath and Leader of Opposition Jitendra Chaudhury taking sharply contrasting positions on nationalism and international solidarity.
The controversy erupted after Nath raised Chaudhury’s participation in the programme during Zero Hour. The minister questioned the presence of the Opposition leader at the event and particularly objected to the display of the Cuban national flag.
Nath argued that while a foreign flag could appropriately be displayed during the visit of a foreign dignitary, its presence at a political programme required explanation. He also alleged that Chaudhury had made comments at the event that could be interpreted as questioning Indian nationalism.
The minister’s remarks prompted strong protests from BJP legislators, who demanded that Chaudhury apologise publicly. The exchange between the treasury benches and Opposition members grew increasingly heated, disrupting the proceedings and eventually prompting the Speaker to adjourn the House.
Chaudhury subsequently dismissed the allegations, accusing Nath of giving a political colour to his remarks and unnecessarily bringing an outside programme into the Assembly.
Explaining his speech at the Castro event, Chaudhury said he had spoken about India’s long tradition of respecting individuals across national boundaries who had contributed to humanity, freedom and civilisation. He maintained that his comments were not against nationalism but reflected a broader understanding of the Indian concept of national identity.
The Opposition leader invoked Swami Vivekananda’s address at the 1893 World’s Parliament of Religions in Chicago, along with references to Rabindranath Tagore and Dr Taraknath Kotnis, to argue that Indian thought had historically embraced solidarity with people beyond the country’s borders.
Chaudhury also defended his remarks on Castro, portraying the former Cuban leader as a symbol of resistance, patriotism and the struggle for national independence. He referred to Cuba’s prolonged confrontation with the United States as an example of a smaller nation asserting its independence.
On the flag controversy, Chaudhury said both the Indian and Cuban flags had been displayed at the programme and questioned why this should become a political issue.
He further criticised Nath for using Zero Hour to raise the matter, arguing that the Assembly should concentrate on issues directly affecting the people of Tripura.
The confrontation marked a contentious beginning to the monsoon session, with the Castro programme becoming a wider political battle over nationalism, patriotism and the interpretation of international solidarity.
