Adani Is Welcome in Congress-Ruled States, But a Scandal When Modi Works With Him?
Something rather inconvenient happened for Rahul Gandhi’s favourite political narrative on August 18.
Kerala Chief Minister V.D. Satheesan flagged off the first export-import containers from Vizhinjam International Seaport as the project moved into full-scale EXIM operations. It was an important moment for Kerala: a major deep-water port moving beyond transshipment and beginning direct import-export cargo operations, with the potential to strengthen the state’s logistics network, attract investment and create new economic activity around one of India’s most strategically located ports.
And standing at the heart of this infrastructure story is a name Indians have heard repeatedly from Rahul Gandhi for years: Adani.
Adani Ports is the private concessionaire developing and operating Vizhinjam. The relationship is neither peripheral nor symbolic. Adani Vizhinjam Port Private Limited has been the project’s private partner since construction began in December 2015, and Adani Ports remains the company operating and developing the port today.
That creates an uncomfortable political picture.
Rahul Gandhi has spent years making Gautam Adani one of the central characters in his attack on Prime Minister Narendra Modi. In Parliament, on election stages, at press conferences and through social media, Gandhi has repeatedly alleged that Modi’s relationship with Adani represents preferential treatment and crony capitalism. Reuters described this criticism as “long-running” during the 2024 general election and later reported that Gandhi had led the opposition attack over Modi’s alleged links with Adani following the Hindenburg controversy.
Yet when an Adani-operated asset becomes an engine of development in a Congress-ruled state, suddenly we are discussing cargo, investment, maritime connectivity and economic opportunity.
That is the contradiction Rahul Gandhi and his army of Congress loyalists should now explain.
Rahul Gandhi Made Adani a Political Symbol
There would be nothing unusual about an opposition leader questioning a particular contract, asking whether procurement rules were followed or demanding an investigation into specific allegations. Governments and large corporations should always be open to scrutiny.
Rahul Gandhi’s politics around Adani, however, has developed into something much larger.
Adani has repeatedly become shorthand for Gandhi’s broader accusation that the Modi government works for a select group of billionaires. In March 2023, after his disqualification from Parliament, Gandhi publicly argued that the controversy surrounding him was connected to the questions he had been asking about Modi’s relationship with Gautam Adani. The BJP rejected that claim, saying his disqualification resulted from the court judgment in his defamation case.
The theme continued through the 2024 election. Gandhi repeatedly invoked Adani and Ambani while attacking Modi’s economic model and alleging that state resources had benefited major industrialists. Reuters noted at the time that neither side produced evidence for some of the campaign-financing accusations being traded during that particular election exchange.
Following the US indictment involving Gautam Adani and other executives in November 2024, Gandhi again placed himself at the front of the political attack and called for Adani’s arrest. The Adani Group denied the allegations against its executives.
Whatever one thinks of those individual controversies, the political message delivered to Congress supporters over several years has been unmistakable: Adani has been presented not merely as another corporation requiring scrutiny, but as a symbol of what Rahul Gandhi believes is fundamentally wrong with the Modi government.
And that is precisely why Vizhinjam matters politically.
Then Comes Vizhinjam — And Reality Enters the Debate
Government changes political rhetoric very quickly because government forces politicians to confront economic reality.
Ports cannot be built through slogans.
Massive infrastructure requires capital, engineering expertise, international networks, operational capability and the willingness to take enormous long-term commercial risks.
Vizhinjam is India’s first deep-water container transshipment port. Its location close to major international shipping routes gives it the potential to handle cargo that India has historically routed through overseas transshipment hubs. Adani Ports is the private concessionaire developing and operating it.
Kerala understands the opportunity.
That is why the image of a Congress chief minister flagging off EXIM cargo from an Adani-operated port is so politically powerful.
The Adani operating Vizhinjam is not a different Adani from the one Rahul Gandhi attacks from Delhi.
The cranes do not change ownership according to which political party is giving the speech.
The corporation does not magically transform from “crony capitalism” into “infrastructure partner” when one crosses a state boundary.
If Adani’s participation in infrastructure is acceptable when it helps a Congress government generate investment and economic activity, then the mere presence of the Adani name cannot logically become evidence of wrongdoing whenever Narendra Modi is involved.
That does not mean every allegation against Adani is automatically false. It means allegations must stand on their own evidence.
“Adani is involved” cannot itself be the argument.
Congress Is Not Wrong to Work With Adani — That Is Precisely the Point
There is an important distinction here.
Kerala should not be criticised for working with Adani Ports.
It should pursue investment. It should expand Vizhinjam. It should encourage logistics companies, manufacturers, exporters and global shipping businesses to build around the port. If private capital can strengthen Kerala’s economy while contractual safeguards protect the public interest, the government should welcome it.
That is what responsible governance looks like.
And that is precisely why Rahul Gandhi’s rhetoric deserves scrutiny.
The criticism is not that Congress is working with Adani.
The criticism is that Congress understands the value of working with Adani when it governs, while Rahul Gandhi repeatedly uses Adani as a political weapon when attacking Modi.
Those two positions can only coexist comfortably if Congress applies a consistent standard.
If Rahul Gandhi believes a specific Modi government decision improperly benefited the Adani Group, identify the decision and establish the evidence.
If a tender was manipulated, show how.
If regulations were improperly altered, demonstrate it.
If public money was unlawfully diverted, establish the trail.
But simply placing “Modi” and “Adani” next to each other and expecting the association itself to prove wrongdoing becomes increasingly difficult to defend when Congress governments themselves recognise Adani companies as legitimate partners in major infrastructure.
Kerala has just demonstrated that distinction more effectively than any BJP spokesperson could.
Wealth Creators Become Villains on the Campaign Stage and Partners in the Secretariat
This contradiction extends beyond one company.
India is attempting to build ports, highways, renewable-energy capacity, manufacturing ecosystems, airports, logistics corridors, data centres and modern urban infrastructure on a scale that requires enormous amounts of private capital.
Government cannot finance every project itself, nor should it attempt to.
Large Indian companies will inevitably participate.
That does not place corporations above scrutiny. But neither should size, profitability or proximity to government automatically be treated as evidence of corruption.
There is a peculiar political habit in India where wealth creators can become convenient villains during election campaigns but desirable investors the moment the same political party enters the secretariat.
Opposition politicians can afford to speak as though governments simply choose between “people” and “corporates”.
Chief ministers cannot.
They need jobs.
They need industrial investment.
They need ports capable of attracting global shipping.
They need electricity, logistics, warehouses and supply chains.
They need companies willing to place billions of rupees into projects whose benefits may take years to mature.
Vizhinjam therefore exposes something larger than Rahul Gandhi’s Adani rhetoric. It demonstrates the enormous difference between campaigning about economic development and actually having responsibility for delivering it.
And What About the Congress Chamchas?
Then there are the loyalists who have spent years repeating Rahul Gandhi’s talking points as though the appearance of the word “Adani” settled every argument.
They now have a straightforward question to answer.
Is Kerala being “sold” because Adani Ports operates Vizhinjam?
Is the Congress government enabling crony capitalism by facilitating economic activity around an Adani-developed port?
Should Kerala reject the infrastructure because Gautam Adani happens to own the group operating it?
Should exporters refuse to use Vizhinjam to maintain ideological purity?
Of course not.
And almost nobody serious will argue that they should.
Instead, Vizhinjam will rightly be discussed in terms of trade, jobs, investment, logistics and Kerala’s opportunity to capture a larger share of maritime economic activity.
But that is exactly the language many Congress supporters suddenly forget when Modi is involved.
That is why this is not merely a debate about Adani. It is a debate about intellectual consistency.
One cannot cheer when an Adani crane lifts a container in Kerala and then treat the existence of an Adani project elsewhere as self-evident proof that the country has been “sold”.
If the standard changes because the chief minister belongs to your preferred political party, there was never much of a standard to begin with.
There was only partisanship.
Rahul Gandhi Cannot Have Two Adanis
This is ultimately the political problem Rahul Gandhi has created for himself.
He cannot have two Gautam Adanis.
There cannot be one Adani who represents everything supposedly wrong with Modi’s India and another Adani who becomes an acceptable infrastructure partner when Congress governs.
There cannot be an Adani whose investment proves cronyism in one state and an Adani whose investment represents economic progress in another.
The company remains the company.
What changes is the politics surrounding it.
And that is precisely why Congress must decide what its actual argument is.
If its argument is that all cooperation between governments and major conglomerates is inherently improper, then Congress governments must live by that principle themselves.
If its argument is instead that particular transactions involving Adani and the Modi government were improper, then Congress must prove those particular allegations rather than relying on endless guilt by association.
That would at least create a coherent standard.
What is increasingly difficult to sustain is a political narrative in which Adani is automatically suspicious whenever Modi appears in the sentence but perfectly acceptable whenever a Congress government needs investment.
Conclusion — Vizhinjam Is a Reality Check
The first EXIM containers moving through Vizhinjam offer a useful reality check for Indian politics.
Cargo ships do not sail on hashtags.
Containers do not move because politicians deliver speeches about capitalism.
Ports work because governments, engineers, workers, investors, shipping companies and businesses cooperate to build productive infrastructure.
Kerala understands this.
And Kerala is right.
The state should extract every possible economic advantage from Vizhinjam. It should attract manufacturers, logistics companies and exporters. It should create employment around the port and compete aggressively for maritime business.
But Rahul Gandhi and Congress supporters cannot simultaneously celebrate the economic benefits generated by an Adani-operated port and continue behaving as though Adani’s participation in infrastructure becomes inherently scandalous the moment Narendra Modi enters the picture.
The problem is not that Congress works with Adani.
The problem is that Congress appears to understand the legitimacy of working with Adani when it governs while Rahul Gandhi has spent years turning the same businessman into a political symbol whenever he attacks Modi.
Vizhinjam places that contradiction in plain sight.
And after years of lectures about Adani, Rahul Gandhi and the Congress chamchas who faithfully repeated them owe the country an answer:
If Adani can mean development when Congress is in power, why must Adani automatically mean crony capitalism whenever Modi is involved?
