As stated above, he actually displayed great prudence by not being lured into situations where he could be further accused of “anti-national” appeasement (which has caused him damage before).

Low attention spans and high emotion do not mix well with factual explanations. Furthermore, his presence in both places would have fulfilled nothing – he has no power to change anything, as he has repeatedly argued.

AAP voted against CAA in parliament, which is the most he could do. Also, at JNU, there was a mob ostensibly waiting for him near the gate with the lights off (which attacked Yogendra Yadav) – any ensuing violence would have enabled BJP to postpone the Delhi elections. This is quite apparent if you reconstruct the events from that day.

And as far as Shaheen Bagh goes, the women there have publicly stated that they do not feel upset or slighted in the least about Kejriwal not coming there, so why is the “liberal” set hyperventilating on their behalf?

Is the idea that Kejriwal may not want to virtue-signal like them unpalatable?

As far as his comment about being able to clear Shaheen Bagh in two hours if he had the power (including the police) is concerned, he already had clarified that he supports the protesters, but also that since citizens are being inconvenienced, there needs to be an amicable solution found.

Saying that he did not have the police under him in this context gave the wrong impression perhaps (which he needs to be careful about) because absolutely nothing indicates that he intended to use any kind of force.

That has simply not been AAP’s way of dealing with any problem in their entire lifespan. It is not out of place to invoke their humanism here.