‘Tashkent Files’ to ‘Kashmir Files’: Sanjay Raut Calls Out Modi’s Film Marketing Strategies in Politics

In a striking commentary that underscores the ideological divides within Indian politics, Shiv Sena (UBT) MP Sanjay Raut articulated his party’s belief in the legacy of Veer Savarkar, a notable figure in Hindu nationalist history.

Raut stated, “Asaduddin Owaisi has a different ideology. We believe in Veer Savarkar.” This reference to Savarkar, who is often positioned as a foundational thinker for Hindutva ideology, highlights Raut’s alignment with a particular vision of Hindutva that contrasts sharply with the secular and multi-religious ethos promoted by Owaisi and his party, the All India Majlis-e-Ittehad-ul-Muslimeen (AIMIM).

Ideological Divergence: Shiv Sena (UBT) vs. AIMIM

This ideological schism is emblematic of the broader struggle for power in Indian politics, where various parties attempt to carve out distinct identities. While Raut’s comments present an alignment with traditional Hindutva values rooted in centuries of Indian history, Owaisi’s position often emphasizes the need for an inclusive approach that respects India’s pluralism. This divergence represents a microcosm of the larger electoral battle, which seeks to frame narratives around nationalism, religion, and community representation.

#WATCH | Mumbai | Shiv Sena (UBT) MP Sanjay Raut says, "Asaduddin Owaisi has a different ideology. We believe in Veer Savarkar. Nobody can tell what PM Narendra Modi's mindset is. He has marketed a lot of films that align with his party, be it Tashkent Files, Kashmir Files,… pic.twitter.com/mnNcH8aN4B

— ANI (@ANI) March 15, 2025

PM Modi’s Connection to Cinema and Ideology

Raut’s remarks regarding PM Modi’s use of cinema as a political tool draw attention to the intersection of popular culture and political messaging. By noting that Modi has prominently aligned with films like “Tashkent Files,” “Kashmir Files,” “Chhava,” and “The Accidental Prime Minister,” Raut implies a deliberate strategy to utilize cinema as a narrative device to shape public perception.

These films, often centered around themes of nationalism, tragedy, and governance, serve to reinforce the ruling party’s narrative by depicting historical events in a particular light. For instance, “Kashmir Files” specifically focuses on the exodus of Kashmiri Pandits, evoking emotional responses that contribute to a sense of victimization and a call for nationalistic redemption.

The strategic use of such films may aim to galvanize voter support by framing the BJP as the protector of Hindu interests, a narrative central to their platform.

Historical Context: Accountability on Ideological Interpretations

In pointing out the need for PM Modi to engage with the works of influential ideologues like M. S. Golwalkar, Raut moves the conversation into the realm of historical accountability. He emphasized, “If M. S. Golwalkar presented his views on Chhatrapati Sambhaji Maharaj, it is PM Modi’s responsibility to watch the movie and claim that what Golwalkar wrote is wrong.”

This statement serves two purposes: it demands that the Prime Minister confront and critically engage with the ideologies that have shaped his party’s foundations, and it highlights the expectation that leaders should not merely endorse historical narratives but also be willing to challenge them when necessary.

The Implications of Ideological Narratives in Indian Politics

Raut’s comments illuminate the significant implications of ideological narratives in contemporary Indian politics. As parties navigate a complex electoral landscape, the valorization of historical figures plays a crucial role in mobilizing voter bases.

By invoking the legacies of figures like Savarkar and Sambhaji Maharaj, political leaders can foster a sense of collective identity and continuity that resonates with their supporters.

However, this practice can also lead to polarization, as contrasting interpretations of history can alienate certain community groups. For example, while Savarkar’s legacy is celebrated in certain circles as a champion of Hindu nationalism, others critique it as exclusionary and backward-looking.

The Role of Cultural Narratives

The intersection of politics and cinema is particularly significant in India, where films often serve as both entertainment and a medium for ideological expression.

Raut’s criticism of Modi’s engagement with films associated with the ruling party indicates an awareness of how storytelling shapes public consciousness and political discourse. The popularity of such films may reflect, and even contribute to, the prevailing narratives that the BJP seeks to promote in order to consolidate its power.

In addition, Raut’s demand for Modi to critically assess Golwalkar’s interpretations of historical figures indicates a broader expectation for leaders to engage thoughtfully with the narratives they promote. This highlights the delicate balance political figures must navigate in appealing to their base while also addressing the concerns and critiques from other factions of society.

The Political Climate Ahead

The tension between various ideological frameworks—as illustrated by Raut’s comments—exemplifies how deeply embedded these divisions are in the national discourse. Parties will need to actively engage with these narratives, as failure to do so could further alienate voter segments and exacerbate the polarization seen in current political climates.

The dialogues initiated by leaders like Raut contribute to an ongoing examination of how history, ideology, and popular culture intermingle to shape modern political identities in India.