By Afrida Hussain
In a political climate increasingly defined by high-stakes narratives, the recent accusations against Elizabeth Colburn Gogoi and Gaurav Gogoi raise important questions about the intersection of governance, national security, and electoral strategy. Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma’s allegations of corruption and supposed links to hostile foreign entities— including Pakistan’s ISI and organizations tied to billionaire George Soros— have ignited a firestorm. However, as the dust settles, one crucial aspect remains conspicuously absent: substantiated evidence and official action.
Ready for a challenge? Click here to take our quiz and show off your knowledge!
The Question of Intelligence and Accountability
If these allegations hold any weight, the immediate question is: why haven’t India’s premier intelligence agencies— RAW, IB, or NIA— acted against Elizabeth Colburn Gogoi? National security threats of this magnitude should be addressed through intelligence-led interventions, not partisan mudslinging. If the BJP, as the ruling party, truly believes in the validity of these claims, why is there no legal action, FIRs, or official investigation reports— only social media narratives?
By allowing such serious allegations to be aired primarily through social media rather than official channels, the BJP inadvertently casts doubt on its own government’s efficiency and intelligence-gathering mechanisms. If Elizabeth truly posed a risk, shouldn’t she have been under scrutiny long before the election cycle? If not, are these claims merely political rhetoric?
Resurfacing Old Allegations: A Pattern of Political Timing
The case of Gaurav Gogoi follows a familiar trajectory. The BJP has revived a 2015 photo showing Gogoi at an event with the Pakistani High Commission, linking it to national security concerns. Yet, as Gogoi clarified, this was part of an academic engagement under the Youth Forum on Foreign Policy (YFFP), which has interacted with diplomats from various nations, including the US, UK, and Israel. The event was public, widely covered by the media, and did not attract any adverse attention from security agencies at the time.
Ready for a challenge? Click here to take our quiz and show off your knowledge!
This raises a critical issue: if the government had genuine concerns about the YFFP’s activities, why was no action taken over the past decade? Why is this issue resurfacing now, just as elections approach? Such patterns suggest that national security is increasingly being used as a political tool— weaponized when convenient and ignored when not.
The Broader Danger: Undermining Intelligence and Real Threats
This is not the first time allegations of anti-national activities or foreign influence have been used for political gain. The danger of such tactics lies in their potential to erode the credibility of intelligence agencies and dilute genuine security threats. If every political opponent can be painted as a national security risk without due process, real dangers risk being drowned out by partisan noise.
A democracy must operate on the principles of transparency and accountability. If there is credible evidence against Elizabeth Colburn Gogoi or Gaurav Gogoi, the government must pursue a legal and investigative path rather than relying on social media campaigns and selective leaks. Conversely, if no such evidence exists, these allegations must be seen for what they are— electoral strategies rather than legitimate national security concerns.
National Security Must Be Above Politics
India’s national security concerns must be handled with the seriousness they deserve. Using intelligence and security narratives as mere political tools not only weakens institutional integrity but also diminishes public trust in real security threats when they arise.
If the BJP or any political party has concrete evidence to support these claims, they should immediately initiate transparent investigations rather than resorting to sensationalism. Otherwise, such accusations will continue to be viewed as strategic political maneuvering rather than genuine concerns about India’s sovereignty.
In a democracy, political battles must be fought on policies, governance, and vision— not on unsubstantiated security threats that serve short-term electoral gains but undermine long-term national stability.