Another BJP push: Secularism in India at its journey's end?

From 1947, when India achieved independence from the British, to 2003 is a long journey of over five eventful decades, during which much water has flowed down the Ganges, India's history has witnessed both the glorious rise and tragic fall of its much-vaunted secularism as a state policy or ideology. It seems to have been mercilessly hacked and thrown into the lumber room of history. The much-cherished dream of Mahatma Gandhi and Pandit Nehru of making India a model secular state gradually went downhill following their death and the subsequent failure on the part of the new Congress leadership, including Mrs. Indira Gandhi, and her son Rajiv Gandhi, both of whom died at the hands of assassins (luckily not Islamic militants but extremists belonging to their own religion). Even the Father of the Indian nation had to succumb to an assassin's bullet. That was just the beginning of the end.

Unfortunately, the new Congress leadership that inherited Congress rule at the centre, following the deaths of Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi, lacked vision and foresight. They failed to foresee the impending tragedy that was to engulf India's secularism and for that matter also Congress which stood for it. Sonia Gandhi entered the scene as president of the 'late lamented' Congress party to try to put the sinking ship on an even keel. But she was too late. Moreover, internal strife and personality clashes have created an unhealthy atmosphere for Sonia. Many of the Congress leaders who considered themselves 'sons of the soil' were dead against her leadership, dubbing her a 'foreigner.' So the 'cancer' that was creeping in the body politic of India, following the death of Nehru, was now spreading its tentacles slowly but steadily until the first appearance in 1986 of the BJP, based on Hindutra as its political 'cult,' as a big challenge to secularism and a new political force to challenge Congress.

Rise of BJP as Deadly Rival of Congress

But it was a very humble beginning for the BJP, with only two members in a 545-member Indian Parliament -- a drop in the ocean indeed. But they didn't lose heart. Nobody could even comprehend that this tiny force would become, within a decade, a powerful and deadly rival of Congress to oust it from its decades long monopoly of power over India. The Congress leaders were then, and even today, living in a fool's paradise about their popularity and political influence. And they had to pay through the nose for their political folly and miscalculation about their own dwindling political muscle, when the Congress was recently ousted by BJP from three of their most solid strongholds and power-bases. Perhaps the Congress forgot the age-old saying that there is no such thing as a "little enemy." So when the supporters of the BJP were celebrating their sweeping victory in the recently-held elections in three Hindi-heartland states, the Congress leaders were licking their fatal wounds, and perhaps mourning the sad demise of Congress and 'secularism' in India. India's Deputy Prime Minister, LK Advani, who is today considered the most powerful man in the BJP, and its Sangh paribar, commenting on the outcome of the recent election, said that this round of elections had "certainly strengthened the BJP's position" for the up-coming general elections due to be held next October.

So it is almost clear now for whom the bell tolls. In fact, the alarm bell for the Congress had been rung more than a decade ago with the BJP's debut in Indian Parliament in 1986, albeit with only two members. Hindutva, which had already struck its roots in Indian soil, but was foolishly ignored by the Congress, showed its robustness in 1991, capturing 86 seats, a big leap forward, proving once again that "great oaks grow from little acorns." It was a wake-up call for Congress to pull up their socks to face the challenge. But the Rip van Winkles woke up only after their disastrous fall in 1996, when the BJP emerged as the largest single party in parliament with 160 seats, thus putting an end to Congress rule in India, perhaps for good, with the assistance of other like-minded anti-Congress parties formed into a National Democratic Alliance (NDA). This overturning of the Congress apple-cart served as a big signal of the shape of things to come.

But why this U-turn?

But why this U-turn on the part of the secular-minded people of India, of whom more than 80 per cent are Hindus? They cannot be right away blamed for the unsung and unlamented burial of secularism and Congress. They had shown their confidence in the Congress by putting them in power at the centre as well as in the provinces continuously for decades starting from when Pandit Nehru was the most popular and charismatic leader. The decline came following the end of the Nehru regime. But the people were ultimately frustrated and rather disillusioned about the Congress leadership and naturally they were looking for a change for the better. And at this opportune moment in came the BJP with a big and promising socio-economic programme with an alluring tinge of religious flavour of Hindutva, to bring about a revolutionary change in India. It was the BJP's Hindutva triumph-card that worked the miracle for them, beginning with the razing of the 400-year old Babri Masjid to build the Rama temple there, claimed by the Hindus to be the birth place of Lord Rama.

The Congress was in a fix as to how to face the religious zealots. Congress PM Narasimha Rao was following a double standard of killing the snake without breaking the stick. So he had to cautiously use the stick on the BJP and Sangh-Paribar 'senas' with more attention to save the stick than to hit the culprits with it. He thus failed miserably. And extremist Hindus, led by the BJP and Sangh-Paribar leaders, marched over the most deplorable statesmanship of Rao. Perhaps Rao was trying to follow a middle-course of eating tobacco and drinking milk at the same time. But the middle course is not always the way to go. That is why some wise-guy once advised that "standing in the middle of the road is very dangerous: you get knocked down by the traffic from both sides". It was, therefore, a cruel joke on the Congress which lost both ways by losing the confidence of the Muslims on one hand and conceding to the BJP a huge Hindu vote-bank on the other.

Vajpayee Becomes Kargil Hero

Thus the BJP, with its NDA supporting coalition, started its maiden journey in high gear in 1996 as the first communal ruling party in the history of India's politics since 1947. Besides, Vajpayee became a national hero as he came out with flying colours as a 'Kargil hero' by successfully pushing out the Pakistan-based militants from the soil of India just before the 1996 general elections. That was a big plus point for him. Secondly, a behind the scenes game was played by then US President Bill Clinton who invited then Pakistani PM Nawaz Sharif to Washington and pressured him to withdraw the Pakistani militants from the India-administered Kashmir.

This Indo-US tete-a-tete prior to the Indian election had a two-pronged impact. First, by helping India's efforts to drive out Pakistani infiltrators from Indian Kashmir, America made huge inroads into India's socio-economic and political life. Secondly, Vajpayee became a national hero overnight by not only ousting Pakistanis from Indian soil, but also by drawing America much closer to India, away from Pakistan in what appeared to be a breach of a long-standing Pak-US relationship beginning from the time of Pakistan's first Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan. So it was a great achievement on the part of Vajpayee. And naturally, the majority community of India came forward to strengthen the hands of such a leader in the 1996 elections. And that is what America also wanted because they were convinced that it would be easier to deal with rightist party like BJP, than any other party, including Congress, to cope with their future strategy in the context of Asian security, particularly, with an eye on the emergence of China as an Asian giant, both economically and politically.

Vajpayee's Asian Union: "Not Unrealistic"

Anyway, the recent victory of the BJP over the Congress in three former Congress strongholds has greatly boosted the morale of the BJP leaders for their confrontation in the upcoming general elections, where the Congress seems destined for doom unless some miracle turns the table in its favour. Soft-spoken and politically now more mature than other leaders, Prime Minister Vajpayee speaks in short sentences but carries meaning in what he says. Mr Vajpayee recently suggested at a Delhi conference, attended by several Asian nations, the formation of an 'Asian Union,' following the example of the European Union, with one currency like the Euro and open borders, in order to establish peace and security in the region to augment economic development. Pakistan, an arch rival of India, responded by saying that Vajpayee's suggestion was "not unrealistic," but that "the idea has to go a long way to materialise." The most encouraging thing in Pakistan's reaction is that it did not reject the idea out of hand. It is undoubtedly a good sign for further progress towards establishing not only normal relations between the two Asian nuclear powers but also for the whole region as well.

But to achieve this goal some of the sabre-rattling leaders of the BJP will have to give up their policy of always playing to the gallery to win applause for the most effective trump-card of Hindutva. They will have to give up their policy of preaching communal violence. What LK Advani said during the razing of the Babri Masjid: "The religious violence racking India today was an inevitable reaction in Hindu society to the policy (followed by Congress) of double-standard and politics of minorities" was like putting a match-stick to the hay-stack. Rather, leaders like Advani will have to practise what they preach in the name of peace and stability. Advani said sometime back during his visit to Canada: "We will guarantee minorities equality, justice and freedom of worship," and that the BJP was "committed to maintaining India as a secular state." A very generous gesture of good will, no doubt. But the double-standard of saying one thing and practicing another won't help India to achieve its goal. So India should be more cautious in setting its own house in order, before taking a lead in establishing an 'Asian Union' with a single currency and open borders. Otherwise, India, being the largest democracy in the world, is likely to lose its credibility and its ambition of becoming an Asian leader and subsequently its dream of securing permanent membership in the proposed expansion of the UN Security Council.

AMM Shahabuddin is a retired UN official.