Shashi Tharoor Slams BCCI's 'Appalling' Decision To Axe Mustafizur Rahman

Tharoor begins by highlighting the logical inconsistency of BCCI’s stance. Mustafizur was part of the official auction pool - a list of players vetted, registered, and approved by BCCI itself.

Describing the move as "absolutely appalling," Tharoor argues that the decision represents a dangerous politicization of sport and a fundamental misunderstanding of regional diplomacy.

Source : PTI

In a powerful opinion piece for The Indian Express, Congress MP Shashi Tharoor has sharply criticized BCCI’s directive to Kolkata Knight Riders (KKR) to release Bangladeshi pacer Mustafizur Rahman.

Describing the move as "absolutely appalling," Tharoor argues that the decision represents a dangerous politicization of sport and a fundamental misunderstanding of regional diplomacy.

The Meritocracy Argument

Shashi Tharoor begins by highlighting logical inconsistency of BCCI's stance. Mustafizur was part of the official auction pool - a list of players vetted, registered, and approved by BCCI itself.

For the board to retroactively punish a franchise for selecting an "eligible" player is, in Tharoor’s view, a betrayal of the IPL's professional ecosystem. He argues that if a player is fit to be auctioned, they should be fit to play, regardless of sudden shifts in the political climate.

"Bangladesh is Not Pakistan"

The core of Tharoor’s argument lies in differentiating India’s relationship with its neighbors.

He asserts that conflating the internal political instability of Bangladesh with the state-sponsored hostility of Pakistan is a "diplomatic blunder."

While India has legitimate concerns regarding the safety of minorities in Bangladesh, Tharoor emphasizes that Bangladesh does not export terror as a matter of state policy.

To impose a "Pakistan-style" sporting isolation on Dhaka ignores the shared cultural, economic, and historical ties that define the bilateral relationship.

The Moral and Religious Question

Tharoor also raises a poignant moral concern: why must cricket alone carry burden of social media outrage?

He points out that Mustafizur Rahman is a professional athlete who has never engaged in hate speech or anti-India rhetoric. By targeting him, India risks appearing intolerant.

Tharoor asks a provocative question: would the reaction have been different if the player were a Bangladeshi Hindu like Litton Das? He warns that such "reflexive decisions" demean India's image as a nation with a "broad mind and a big heart."

Diplomatic Fallout

The piece concludes by noting the practical consequences of this decision. The tension has already led to Bangladesh Cricket Board (BCB) expressing concerns over traveling to India for T20 World Cup.

Tharoor suggests that instead of using sportsmen as "political pawns," India should let its diplomats handle the complex work of foreign policy while allowing the playing field to remain a sanctuary for merit.

To do otherwise, he suggests, is to sacrifice the spirit of the game on the altar of performative nationalism.