| Home | About | Introduction | Achives | Ideas & Comments | Documents | Today's Events | Contact Us |
 |
 |
||||
| Syed Shahabuddin is a well known in the political and academic circles as well as in the mass media and does not need an introduction. In his many incarnations he has been a university teacher, a diplomat, who served as an ambassador and a government official who was at the time of his seeking pre-mature retirement, the Joint Secretary in charge of South East Asia, the Indian Ocean and the Pacific in the Ministry of External Affairs. He was a MP for three terms between 1979 and 1996 and made a mark as a Parliamentarian. He has edited Muslim India, the monthly journal of research, documentation and reference from 1983 to 2002 and again from July 2006. He has been a regular contributor on current affairs in the media and a familiar participant in seminars and TV discussions. He has been a member of many learned bodies and associated with several Muslim institutions and organizations. More... |
||||
|
||||
 |
GUJARAT, 2007 AND THE FUTURE OF SECULAR INDIA Narendra Modi massive victory in the Gujarat Election, 2007 has taken both friends and foes by surprise and has been described as ‘historic’, ‘fabulous’, ‘phenomenal’ and ‘extraordinary’. The BJP has won the electoral battle for the 4th time in succession and Modi has been installed as Chief Minister for the 3rd time, almost matching the record of the Left Front in West Bengal. BJP’s margin of victory in terms of number of seats is indeed surprising, considering the odds that it faced, not counting the anti-incumbency factor. The state BJP was divided with some eminent members including two former Chief Ministers openly critical to the point of some leaders and legislatures joining hands overtly or covertly with the Congress; the national leadership of the BJP had no doubt endorsed Modi but only half heartedly; Modi’s arrogance had reached the point of megalomania to project himself as the lone hero of Hindutva battling against the demons. His style of functioning had alienated his colleagues and had displeased the Sangh Parivar-the RSS, the VHP and the Bajrang Dal which had worked day and night for him in 2002 but were no longer in the picture. Even the sadhus and sants who command much influence in Gujarat did not join his campaign. Other BJP leaders, including national office bearers and CM’s did not come forward to share his burden. Even Advani who peeped in from time to time left the field to Modi. His campaign was thus a one man show. Modi more or less distributed party tickets, replacing many sitting MLAs, developed his own campaign team and with his incomparable energy and organizing ability, addressed hundreds of public meetings, big and small throughout Gujarat. With his eloquent command over Gujarati, coupled by his body language, choosing his words carefully, the unparalleled spindoctor that he is Modi conveyed to his audience through hints and gestures, suggestions and innuendoes, what he wanted, his real meaning and message and succeeded in identifying Muslims as the historic enemy and the real adversary he did not name them to avoid falling fail of the Election Commission. He only brought to the surface their deep seated animosities fears and anxieties. With no love for democracy, with no belief in the rule of law, with no respect for human rights Modi remained true to his convictions and unapologetically preached his essentially anti-Muslim message. He never uttered a word of sympathy for the victims for 2002 nor a word of regret or remorse. Modi thus faithfully played the Hindutva tune, spiced with Gujarati sub- nationalism and the common man’s desire for economic development. He enjoyed the support of the business elite and the rising middle class and the Gujarati diaspora in the West which had financed him all along and saw him as the incorruptible and efficient standard bearer of militant Hinduism and the saviour of the Hindus whose mission was to consolidate Hindutva, based on Hindu supremacy with Gujarat as the chosen laboratory of Hindu Rashtravad. A Koli by caste, with a moderate background, Modi had a passion for social engineering to consolidate all Hindus into an irresistible and hegemonic political force and to make Gujarat into a model state blending Hindutva with development. No doubt after this election Modi has not only emerged as the tallest Hindutva leader in Gujarat but also the tallest among the second generation leaders of the BJP. Never before regarded as the natural successor to Vajpayee-Advani duo, his victory has almost settled the question of succession. As in 2002, the election was basically a one-to-one contest between the Congress and the BJP. But the former lacked the vision, strategy and even tactical finesse to meet Modi’s thrust. It did somewhat better than in 2002, gained 11 more seats and 3.8% more votes. But it could have done better and reduced the gap but it faced a number of adverse factors. Because of in-fighting between old timers and newcomers it failed to designate a Chief Minister in-waiting. The state party long exiled from power, was in poor shape and the cadres lacked direction and confidence. They were further demoralized by seeing BJP rebels being given undue weight and accommodated against winnable seats at the cost of party hopefuls. The BJP rebels included some who had been directly and deeply involved in the carnage of 2002 whom the Congress faithful at the grass rots could not stomach or campaign. What is worse they lowered the Congress credibility in the public eye. Not surprisingly, all 14 BJP rebels embraced by the Congress lost, except one. Other secular parties including CPI, CPM RJD and SP drew blank apart from the NCP which won 3 seats out of 10 allotted to it. The BSP which contested 166 seats, against 34 in 2002, also did not win a single seat but by cutting into the Congress votes caused considerable damage. It was responsible for the defeat of 10 Congress candidates and reduced the margin of victory in 13 others. Independents including Congress rebels with or without the BSP caused the loss of 10-20 more seats to the BJP. It is obvious that in a direct fight and against a consolidated secular alliance, the BJP would have been routed. Modi played the development card on the basis of the universally acknowledged economic progress registered by Gujarat with large scale foreign investment, raising the average annual GDP growth to 10%. Over the years Gujarat has seen impressive development of infrastructure like highways, roads, water and power. Modi had maintained the tempo and introduced some innovative welfare programmes. As such, all Congress denial of development under Modi failed to win public credibility. Had the Congress identified regions and social groups which did not equitably benefit from development and were bypassed or left behind, its anti-Modi argument would have made better appeal. It should have publicized that Gujarat has always been on the fast track and that its take-off did not owe it to Modi. Instead the Congress brought up forgotten grievances, of farmers and small industrialists which Modi had anticipated and attended to during this least year in office. Yet Modi lost several ministers who looked after development portfolios. The biggest flaw in Congress strategy was its absolute silence over the ideology of Hindutva. It saw the people of Gujarat as mesmerized by the minions of the Sangh Parivar into acolytes of Hindu Rashtravad, who had abandoned their nationalist roots and Gandhian heritage and going further back even Vaishnava philosophy of peaceful coexistence and the cultural interaction and synthesis under the Saltanat which K. M. Pannikar described as the first nationalist state in India. A people may succumb to difficult situations, keep out of the way and turn into silent spectators. But as soon as situations change, they regain their essential ethos. In fact, deliberately or otherwise, once again Congress played the soft and pale saffron card as in 2002 against the hard and deep saffron, the assumption that the Hindu Gujaratis were beyond redemption. Indeed towards the end of the campaign when Sonia Gandhi, Manmohan Singh and Digvijay Singh, by implication, pointed out the ugly face of Moditva in 2002 and thereafter, in the resulting war of words Modi turned the issue on its head and exploited it to reawaken the latent communal sentiments lodged in the mind of Hindu masses for decades and inculcated over the BJP years. For example he played upon the memory of Muslim invasions and the post 9/11 identification of Muslims as terrorists and reminded Hindus that his government had saved Gujarat from Muslim terrorists. Right from the word go, indeed after losing in 2002, the Congress should have hit the nail on the head, condemned the ideology of Hindutva without mincing words in terms of its divisive nature, exclusivist approach, its the threat it posed to national integration, the damage it did to our international reputation, the cost it exacted in human terms. The Congress should have placed in the people’s court, Modi’s calculated defiance of the rule of law, the detention of Muslims under POTA without trial for years, the deliberate and systematic fake encounters, the cleavages in Gujarati society through social and economic boycott of Muslims, forcing the displaced to live in ghettos and makeshift colonies, unable to return home in peace and dignity. The Congress should have pointed out the lack of progress of criminal cases relating to 2002, reopened under orders of the Supreme Court. It should have accused Modi of persistent violation of human rights, which begins with Muslims & Christians but ultimately threatens freedom and dignity of everyone. For 5 years the Congress had not dared to take on Hindutva in Gujarat and its symbol Modi, mortally afraid of alienating Hindu votes. It failed to perceive that time had not stood still and the Hindu mind had inevitably perceived the damage that Modi has done to the reputation and traditions of Gujarat. Communal polarization had palpably receded. There was increasing sense of remorse among many Gujaratis who had sat on the fence in the dark days of 2002 and did not come out into the streets to defend the innocent victims. This misperception of the changing public mood led the Congress not only to embrace the BJP rebels but also to reduce tickets for the Muslims. It is striking that of the 6 Muslim candidates fielded by the Congress, 5 won, 2 more than in 2002. This indicates that the winning Muslim candidates received the votes of some Hindus who felt ideologically distant from Hindutva and closer to secularism. One wishes that the Congress had fielded more Muslim candidates in winnable constituencies. There are only about 15-20% constituencies in Gujarat in which the Muslims constitute 15% or more of the electorate. The Congress appears to have won most of them, obviously with Muslim support. Out of 66 riot-affected constituencies, mostly in Central Gujarat, BJP this time secured only 39 against 27 going to the Congress. In the second phase the Muslims overcame their timidity shaking away fear and nervousness and voted for the Congress wherever they could rejecting the advice of those who urged them to keep away from election, lest they provoke another bout of Hindu militancy. Muslim political workers silently mobilized Muslims voters and canvassed for Congress candidates without any fan-fare. But the voting pattern of Muslims does not necessarily mean renewal of trust in Congress but the absence of any other option. The caste and religious break-up of the general constituencies in Gujarat, of the candidates put up by the Congress and by the BJP, of those who won are not available although both the parties must have taken the dominant caste, or its main rival, into consideration as far as possible in distributing their tickets. In the event, the Congress also made gains in the seats reserved for SC’s and ST’s (15/20, plus 4). Both groups felt that they had been used by the Sangh Parivar in 2002 and then left to fend for themselves. Among the OBC’s, the Congress shortsightedly favoured Leuba Patils who dominate Saurashtra both politically and economically but this meant that other backward castes who have been traditionally exploited by the Patils like the Kolis went back to the BJP. The Congress even lost some Kshatriyas it banked on to rebuild the old KHAM alliance, as they were traditional rivals of the Patils. The Congress did not pay due attentions to the MBC’s, the Backward Backwards. Regionally, BJP took three regions of Kutch- Saurashtra, North Gujarat and South Gujarat with marginal increase of seats but lost to Congress heavily in Central Gujarat which had been comparatively the most disturbed in 2002. For the Muslims it is time for introspection. They should not lose heart. They cannot afford to remain aloof from the day-to-day struggles of the people and expect secular parties to give them their due place in the party organization or in the candidates‘ lists at the time of elections. Muslim youth have to reject extremism, stop looking for patronage or favour and join the battle for Democracy, Secularism and Social Justice, shoulder to shoulder with other marginalized and deprived sections. Not through bravade and provocative gestures but through dialogue, cooperation and accommodation, can they preserve their identity, secure their human and constitutional rights, overcome fear and alienation, regain equality and dignity and reestablish mutual trust and acceptance. It would be premature to write off the Congress in Gujarat. But to give a credible fight to the BJP in the next Assembly election, it will have to rethink both its strategy and tactics. In any case, Modi’s victory is not as formidable as it appears on the first sight or as projected by the mass media which appear to have changed their tune. Statistically, the BJP secured 50.3% of the votes cast against 42.8 for the Congress. With an overall turn-out of 62.5% this implies that BJP received the active support of only 31.4% of the electorate against 26.8 for the Congress. With all his eloquence Modi could not attract more voters or touch their hearts and mind or inspire them to go out and vote for his brand of politics. This also implies, as Sonia Gandhi also realized, that rallies do not translate into votes on the polling day. In the final analysis, there is only a difference of about 4.6% between the two contenders at the electorate level. This could have been easily bridged by an alternative strategy and tactics and astute leadership. Advani has described Modi’s victory as a ‘turning point’ and the BJP ‘on the come back trail’. The entire BJP leadership sees it as a decisive step towards restoration in 2009. But there are many a slip between the cup and the lip. Gujarat is not India. Nor can Modivad be equally plausible, or his style presentable or his spin effective in other parts of the country. Nor do all states repeat Gujarat’s development pattern. All is not lost. Secular forces have lost the battle but not the war. They have lost Gujarat today but not the country for ever. Tthey have not hit the end of the road nor have they fallen in a dark, closed alley. What is needed is a determined and continuous struggle against Hindu Rashtravad whose virus has no doubt seeped deep inside the psyche of Gujarat and infected the body politic. But the infection can be cured. Secular parties have to work sincerely for the formation of a National Secular Alliance, stop trying to outsmart each other, and, at the end, undermine each other. The Alliance has to address the problems and grievances faced by the SCs and STs, the religious minorities as well as the non-Muslim MBC’s, take up issues related to rule of law, social justice, human rights and minority rights, at the grass roots level as well as the difficulties faced by the common man. They have to keep an eye on the track record of all social welfare schemes like the SSA, the NREGP, the IAY, the NRHP etc. in all states, irrespective of the party in power. Thus alone can they rebuild the people’s faith in the democratic system and the secular parties. New Delhi 1 January, 2008 |
