People's Democracy

After Gujarat Polls, What! 

Digant Oza

THE euphoria is over. The Congress is somewhat stunned and in a stupor. For others too, it’s time for introspection. Narendra Modi has won the one-day match but will have to play the test match now. And that is a different game altogether.

In the midst of alternating euphoria and outrage, the so-called Gujarat model or Modification of even India is being discussed at various levels. Even ‘moderates’ like Vajpayee jumped the protocol to celebrate the “Vijay Parva” in Gujarat.

But several questions still remain. What is the Gujarat model and can it be repeated in other parts of India? What is the nature and character of what is called the Modi model? Is it just the BJP’s victory in the recent Gujarat assembly elections? Is it a victory for aggressive Hindutva jingoism? Is it the victory of an individual called Narendra Damodardass Modi? Or a victory of the VHP and Sangh Parivar? Is it a victory of ‘cultural nationalism’ now being bandied? Is it a victory of Gujarat’s gaurava (pride) and asmita (identity)? Is it a victory against Pakistan-sponsored terrorism? Or is it a failure of the BJP’s opponents to benefit from the anti-incumbency factor?

TEMPTING GAINS FROM POLARISATION

Some have reiterated that Gujarat is no more the name of an Indian state; it is now a synonym for communal divide that threatens to break the country’s social fabric and constitutional framework. India’s tradition of tolerance is being attacked in the very land where Gandhi was born. The fact is also that fear was created among the majority community by successfully establishing a baseless equation between the Congress and the Pakistani dictator.

Whatever the answer, the reality is that the BJP has done a hat trick in the assembly. Gujarat may have only 5 per cent of India’s population, but by holding on to its bastion the BJP has put a question mark on all old political equations, though not necessarily on KHAM. This is the first time the BJP has won consequently three terms in a state.

As for the long-term significance of Gujarat, the feeling that Hindus are ‘under siege’ is widespread. Hence our politics will remain tensely perched on a precipice, in the foreseeable future at least. Notwithstanding the calm that prevailed after Akshardham, any incident of violence, whether perpetrated by terrorists or someone else, has the potential of unleashing a vicious cycle of reprisal and counter-violence. Some may conclude from the Gujarat results that it is now politically acceptable to kill innocent Indians and the leadership will justify it in the language of self-defence and revenge.

Gujarat shows the political gains accruing from polarisation through violence are tempting enough for the ruling party. It shows how incendiary the communal atmosphere can become. There are constituencies with an incentive to light the fuse: terrorists who know that their psychological warfare is working, and the BJP that is not reluctant to engage in the politics of polarisation. Whether we admit it or not, we have become a nation susceptible to politics of anxiety, a politics that is more apocalyptic than rational. Will our democracy gradually cease to be a repository of liberal values?

This view may seem apocalyptic to some. But despite occasional reversals, Hindutva has gone from strength to strength and may now be in a position to jettison its remaining inhibitions. Aggression will be the order of the day.  Modi said the Congress victory would be a victory for Musharraf. In a deeper sense, however, Modi’s victory is going to blur the moral lines between India and Pakistan. Perhaps BJP supporters should acknowledge this much: Modi’s victory is a victory for Pakistan. We are becoming what they want us to become. Moreover, it is also a victory for imperialism that wants to balkanise our country.

NO DEFEAT FOR PLURALISM

Maybe we were not able to provide the Gujarati mind, in the short span of a few moths, with an alternative to the propaganda of exclusivity that they have been fed for the last two decades. But the BJP’s victory is not a defeat for all those Indians who believe that mono-culturalism of the Hindutva brand is antithetical to pluralism, the real strength of our nation and a hallmark of our culture. Why is it not a defeat? Because for the first time so many citizens believing in cultural pluralism came together to combat this onslaught on our national ethos and fellow citizens. In fact we will be defeated only if this solidarity is not sustained.

Democracy works in funny ways. A statistical minority may well have a better vision but yet it may lose the numbers game. It must be understood that majoritarianism is a danger that we have to confront if we are to save our democracy. If an experiment of exclusion and hate is conducted in the name of a religion, we have to defend our modern pluralistic version of nationality.

We cannot let Gujarat out of the focus. The journey to peace is long and requires endurance. Quitting now will hurt India’s cause and we will undoubtedly be held responsible for inaction when the posterity analyses history. If India goes the mono-cultural way like its neighbour has tried to do for a long time, then all Indians lose. 

At the same time, the Gujarat model cannot be analysed in isolation from the global realities and the compulsions of international community. Including South Asia, the third world is being thrown into the lap of religious fundamentalism, as part of a general rightward shift internationally. In Bangaldesh, the Khaleda Zia regime is out to appease the fundamentalists. The same with Pakistan. It would be wrong to believe that India would remain unpolluted. For, one fundamentalism does feed another.

This is how the post-Godhra polarisation helped the BJP, especially in central Gujarat. If Modi was the ‘hero’ of Hindutva, the VHP’s international general secretary Dr Praveen Togadia was an architect of the BJP victory.

Dr Togadia himself is in no mood to avoid stressing his outfit’s contribution to Modi’s victory. He told reporters, “In the elections, I alone addressed 60 public meetings out of the 200 addressed by the VHP. Every worker of ours sweated it out till the last day. As the elections were fought on the Hindutva agenda, we will not allow the Gujarat government to deviate from Hindutva.”

Togadia said the polls proved that the BJP had returned to the “Jan Sangh era of Shyama Prasad Mukherjee and Deen Dayal Upadhyaya.” He added, “The VHP can not dictate terms to any party but we will only support that party which will accept our agenda.” A clear signal to NDA partners to fall in line.

GROUND REALITIES

If one looks at the party performance in these elections, the BJP with 49.79 per cent of votes was able to get 69.61 per cent of seats. On the other hand, with 39.31 per cent of votes polled, the Congress could get only  28.18 per cent.  The two communist candidates got 34,342 votes, of which the CPI(M) polled 30,626. The Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) polled 3,48,546 votes and the Samajwadi Party 65,826. These figures do not include the rebel Congressmen who contested elections as independents and polled a sizeable number of votes in some cases.

In the 1998 elections, Shankarsinh Vaghela’s regional outfit (Rashtriya Janata Party) contested as many as 164 seats and lost deposits in 114. It helped the BJP gain 57 seats out of its total of 117. Now, in many of the 126 seats captured by the so-called Moditva wave, the votes polled by the winning candidates are less than the total votes of number 2 and 3 combined. In other words, if Congress and other secular parties had put up a one to one contest and the mistakes in selection of Congress candidates had not created a number of rebel candidates, the BJP could have lost at least 35 seats, if not more. Six such seats in central Gujarat are --- Umreth, Limkheda, Kapadvanj, Sarsa, Matar and Padra. The BJP could have lost probably Mehmedabad and Barod rural also. Do these statistics indicate any “Vijay Parva,” which could be replicated in other states and in the next parliamentary polls?

Despite all frenzied attempts by the Sangh Parivar to replicate the Gujarat model, the simple answer to this question is: NO! It may sound over-optimistic. One such attempt has now begun in Himachal Pradesh, with the chief minister Dhumal’s “Viswas Yatra.” In Madhya Pradesh a meeting of Buddhists was attacked and disrupted. In Rajasthan, the BJP has already won the three byelections, causing concern to the ruling Congress party.

Yet the picture in other states differs. For one thing, BJP units in other states do not have a ‘captain’ like Modi who represents a diabolic jingoism, and who is past master in repeatedly speaking lies and white lies.

Secondly, though attempts will definitely be made, it is not easy to create a fear psychosis among the public, without which Gujarat cannot be repeated.

Togadia, who compared the BJP victory to Shivaji capturing Raigarh Fort, called for a Hindu Rashtra in two years from now. There is little doubt the results have provided a shot in the arm of the VHP and its allies. Issues like Ram Temple and cow slaughter may be taken up at a wider level. Vajpayee, Advani and their ministers will all add to the hate propaganda, blowing hot and cold at the same time to keep some NDA partners in good humour. Terrorism seems to be their focus at present --- a handy weapon to arouse jingoism.

One more difference is that among the states going to the polls, the BJP has a government only in Himachal. In the rest, the state machinery is not in its hands. This will limit its options, as it cannot use state power to sponsor riots and create a fear psychosis. However, it may seek to take advantage of the anti-incumbency factor in Congress-ruled states.

As for Gujarat itself, the citizens would sooner or later ask for development that the BJP has promised them. Gujarat’s economy is in a pretty bad shape.  The state is living on overdrafts and this cannot continue. Drinking water, irrigation, power, employment and infrastructure are badly needed. In fact the BJP high command had to remove Keshubhai Patel from chief ministership in view of the growing mass discontent due to his failure in meeting these requirements. Can Modi be able to feed the masses on Hindutva for long?

Last but not the least, no sectarianism is permissible if one is to fight the BJP. In Gujarat too, things may change if there is unity among the secular formations. But that requires a wave of struggles. With the right will, grit and mass unity, secularism can be strengthened in Gujarat and the country. The coming months could well show that, amidst a winter of stocktaking, a secular spring cannot be far behind if the right lessons are learnt. (INN)