India — Towards Fundamentalism

Columnist HUMERA NIAZI says that Indians are turning to extreme orthodoxy.

If it is not an incident of little importance that India is showing clear signs of dismantling its credentials of a secular democracy, the result of the recent elections in Gujarat speaks volumes in this context. In fact it serves as the reckoning of moving closer to this historical change which foretells negative consequences. Unless wisdom prevails and it is prevented from happening.
It was before the Gujarat elections that a renowned Indian writer stated:-
“ Playing the communal card for power is suicidal but playing it for governance is a national disaster”.
Gujarat is appearing as the epicentre for the politics of hatred and extremism. But it did not erupt by itself but a result of the handiwork of a few, over the past decade against the backdrop of Babri Masjid incident, it comes without any surprise. It has been a difficult situation for analysts to read. While politically, it presented an inability for politicians to counteract this disastrous course. The situation had been wrongly perceived that B.J.P would not hold political ground because the events in Gujarat were seen as the failure of the administration to control things. This resulted in an anarchic scenario which was also seen as state engineered.
What becomes a point of concern is the crucial question as to where would the present Indian political scene lead to. It is difficult to say. India is going under a phase of uncertainty. Two prominent factors have emerged recently which have a negative effect on the Indian realpolitik.

i. The Gujarat election result provided a major B.J.P victory. The fact that the party employed an extremist approach under the cover of Hinduvata. This meant introducing a political order which lives on emotions and not reason.
ii. Soft Hinduvata has been put forth as an alternative to secularism.

After the elections in Gujarat, there is an apprehension that this could be a situation in which the B.J.P could reign in politically. It raises the question, would there be more victories for them in the general elections with the power to use the emotive card and Gujarat election success. This fear perception is toned down because of:

(a) The time factor since there is ample time for the general elections.
(b) How would the B.J.P government fare in terms of ground realities preceding general elections in 2004.
Then it looks like the time is going to be utilized for a counter course of action by the other political side. It is within this proceeding time span that a lot of changes could take place with sensible action.
There is the other view, which is contrary to the opinion that the majority in Gujarat voted pro-Hindu, therefore, the same would happen in other places. The impression is that it would not. This is because in Gujarat the B.J.P faced a make-or-break situation. Losing an election, meant the party would go really down. There was an emotional high immediately after the Godhra incident. The B.J.P tried its best to sell that. Additionally, emotions were exploited and they ran a negative campaign which also bore anti-Pakistan slogans. It appeared as putting up Modiism against the non-violent ideas of Gandhi. This could be seen as a great fall from higher political standards. If Modi Policy can be rewarded in Gujarat, it does not bode quite well. As this does not cause the peace in Gujarat, needed after it saw one of the worst Muslim and Hindu riots which resulted in the killing of two thousand Muslims. What would be logical in Gujarat after such crisis, was the healing of wounds. But instead, an aura of extremism has been created for political gains. Reportedly, observations were made that the killings could have been prevented. Further, it was stated that it also had an organized touch with hit lists of Muslims consulting electoral documents.
The recent statement by Prime Minister Vajpayee and the Defence Minister George Fernandez are an extension of this policy which serves as a cover up for the internal problems India is facing and provides distraction. Vajpayee goes to say India will not give up Kashmir. And Fernandez was speaking of a nuclear war with Pakistan, which did not even appear as war mongering but the words of a person, not quite sane.
There is nothing achieved by this Indian posture, in fact it is moving towards a deteriorating situation, with long-term implications. Further, while it employs extremism and politics of hatred in Gujarat, it is creating a grave social problem with a situation like Gujarat faces, it could result in causing a criminal mentality. How can a government see that happening to its own people? Then it is the economic and instability factor, which has arisen, augurs ill. Also the B.J.P government has clearly depicted failure to control the situation. Although they have a highly Volatile Policy. Advani now depicts a best-of-both-words strategy. This when he has tried to give Hinduvata a new definition. He stated on star television recently “Lets understand, India is secular because the culture, tradition and history of India, whatever you call it, Indianness, Hinduvata (Hinduism) cannot accept this kind of religious fundamentalism.” Further Advani has claimed that Hinduism is opposed to religious extremism. This is the B.J.P’s most recent approach to portray itself as tolerant.
Apart from this internal aspect the Indian policy causes regional tension creating no room for peace. And the international concern, which was visible at the Almaty Summit, has also been discarded. Then there are not normal circumstances in Kashmir, with 700,000 occupation troops and a popular uprising. Additionally, there were farcical elections in I.H.K. This with the Gujarat crisis and tension regionally. It draws international attention.
The Congress blundered when it used soft Hinduvata as an option. By doing it most importantly damaged secularism. This soft Hinduvata stride did not get the Hindu vote and losing the Muslim voters base. But secularism could have served as a choice and drawn in people with a logical approach. It looks like the Congress would have to put on its thinking cap, in order to remedy growing extremism with a positive slogan and reason as to how secularism can be kept alive.
It appears that politics, which merely provide power for any political party, are not the need of the hour. Instead, there should be some dynamic force or motivating leadership to prevent India from putting an end to secularism. The time is now.