A major controversy erupted after Moosa Harraj, the Pakistani president of the Oxford Union, claimed a symbolic “victory” in a debate on India–Pakistan relations that never formally took place. The motion in question argued that India’s policy towards Pakistan was “populism sold as security policy.” While the expert-led debate collapsed amid allegations of manipulation, a separate student debate on the same motion was held at Oxford University in November.

“We have learnt it the hard way, you cannot shame a state that has no shame,” said Bhanushali of Pakistan, the historical sponsor of terror.

Student Debate Takes Centre Stage

In that student-led debate, Mumbai-born Indian law student Viraansh Bhanushali emerged as the most forceful voice, directly countering the Pakistani side led by Harraj himself. Though the debate occurred weeks ago, its official video release in December has now sparked widespread attention, with clips of Bhanushali’s speech going viral online.

Personal Trauma Grounds the Argument

Bhanushali anchored his speech in lived experience, beginning with a personal account of surviving the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks. Referring to the attacks that paralysed the city, he said he shared his story “not to darken the mood but to ground the debate in reality.” Challenging the motion, he remarked, “So when someone claims that India’s tough stance towards Pakistan is merely populism masquerading as security policy, you might understand why I bristle.”

Bhanushali opened his speech with his personal account of 26/11. “One of those targets was Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Terminus (CSMT), the very station that my aunt passed through almost every evening. By chance or by providence she took a different train home that night, narrowly escaping the fate of the 166 souls that did not…”

“I was a schoolboy then, glued to the television as my city burnt. I remember the fear in my mother’s voice on the phone, the tension in my father’s clenched jaw. For three nights, Mumbai did not sleep and neither did I,” said Bhanushali.

‘I Just Need a Calendar’

Rejecting accusations of election-driven security policy, Bhanushali declared, “To win this debate, I do not need to use rhetoric. I simply need to use a calendar.” He cited major terror attacks such as the 1993 Mumbai blasts and 26/11, pointing out that they did not coincide with elections. He further argued that restraint after 26/11 disproved claims of populism, adding, “Did the non-populist approach buy us peace? No. It bought us Pathankot. It bought us Uri. It bought us Pulwama.”

“I grew up under the shadows of these tragedies,” he said.

“So when someone claims that India’s tough stance towards Pakistan is merely populism masquerading as security policy, you might understand why I bristle,” he said. He drew an analogy between the topic in point and door locks, saying, “It sounds like someone telling you that the locks on your doors are just for show, not because there are robberies in the neighbourhood.”

“In March 1993, RDX explosives ripped through Plaza cinema… 257 people died… Was there an election in March 1993? No. That election was 3 years away… Terror did not come because we needed a vote. It came because Dawood and the ISI wanted to fracture India’s financial spine. That was not populism. That was an act of war.”

“What would a populist government do after 26/11? The public rage was nuclear. A populist leader would have just launched the jets to win the next election,” said Bhanushali. “But the government of the day, the Congress party, chose strategic restraint,” adding that India chose diplomacy, sent dossiers, and appealed to the international community.

“Did the non-populist approach buy us peace? No. It bought us Pathankot. It bought us Uri. It bought us Pulwama,” the law student said.

Sharp Critique of Pakistan’s Narrative

Taking aim at Pakistan’s internal politics, Bhanushali said, “You cannot give your people bread, so you give them the circus.” He stressed that India’s actions were calibrated and defensive, concluding, “Defending your citizens from being murdered is popular? That does not make it a trick.”

Debate Resonates Beyond Oxford

While allegations continue over the disrupted expert debate, the student version has drawn praise for its substance and civility. For many viewers, Bhanushali’s closing line summed it up: “If that is populism, then I am a populist.”

Long or Short, get news the way you like. No ads. No redirections. Download Newspin and Stay Alert, The CSR Journal Mobile app, for fast, crisp, clean updates.

App Store – https://apps.apple.com/in/app/newspin/id6746449540

Google Play Store – https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.inventifweb.newspin&pcampaignid=web_share