That Shashi Tharoor would think India need SA (No, the non-cricketing SA, with Riyadh as its capital) to mediate is amusing. Like two kids in the playground asking a teacher to make sense of their squabble. And that he would use loopholes in English language to defend his opinion is even more amusing. Okay, it was not mediator, it was interlocutor. Yeah, we get it. But in a country run by adults, why is this the most opted for choice in conflict resolution?
It is reflective of the choices we individuals make in daily life. It is our collective unconscious speaking, perhaps. The way we need validation, the way we need acceptance, the way we seek actively to avoid conflicts and 'stay in the limelight, but out of the line of fire'. The comfort zones. We want to make a point without taking responsibility for it. If it is accepted well, we bask in the glory of it. If not, "God forbid, I ever meant it like that!" or "Media twists my statements to meet their own ends". Or something to that effect. Few people stick with what they say, even if it is glaringly politically incorrect (Not that I am advocating that). Fewer still honestly apologize (Not advocating that either).
All of the above is speculation devoid of judgment. It is the way the human psyche works. It works towards meeting very basic needs. Of affiliation and acceptance. Of being universally liked and of being right. And, in some cases, the need of a vote-bank.

There is a lot being said about the legend that is SRK, his cricketo-political (What? Isn't that a word yet? Well, it should be.) decision making skills and the intent behind it. Allegations and disclaimers have been flying back and forth. Between not so subtle demands for acquiescence and subtle apologies, media continues to track down every move of his and colour it with their perceptions to suit the palate of the viewers/readers.
What do I feel? Frankly, nothing. He could be pro-India, pro-Pakistan, pro-Afghanistan or pro-Siberia for all I care. And I don't adulate him, nor do I hate his guts. Just no strong feelings either ways. I avoid his movies where I can, I don't enjoy them particularly.
But, this sudden interest in his actions does raise a few questions. As a friend recently mentioned, maybe we *have* been asking the wrong questions. The point is not how he feels about Pakistani players in IPL or what his opinion on Jihad is. The point is, why does it bother us so much? Another person, another opinion. High profile, only because we make it so. We are an emotional lot, us Indians. We tend to put our 'celebrities' on a pedestal and worship them. We build temples for them and break coconuts at their movies' releases. And when their thought processes don't line in with ours, we feel immensely let down. Why? So he has a certain perception about a certain country, and mine don't conform with that. So, my neighbour's favourite colour is pink, and I hate it. Should I declare war on him?
I understand that peoples' concern in this issue was that celebrities have a certain social responsibility that comes with being powerful. 2 things- *WE* vest them with this power. And social responsibility is not exclusive to the political, acting or sporting community by any stretch of imagination. And definitely not because they are in the limelight.
Democracy was about electing an able, qualified representative. It was never about idolizing an actor and making him the demigod of politics. If people are going to subscribe to opinions just because Shahrukh or whoever else voices them, we have big, big problems...bigger problems than his opinions in the first place.