Challenges before the BJP
By S. Sahay
NOTHING seems to be going right for the BJP at present. The controversy over Bababudangiri is something it could have done without, especially after the shattering defeat of the party in the Delhi and Rajasthan elections and its failure to dislodge the Congress Government in Madhya Pradesh. The trouble is that this supposedly disciplined party has no control whatsoever over the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and the Bajrang Dal, which have their own agenda in which the well-being of the Vajpayee Government does not seem to figure at all.

New leaders, new agenda
By Harihar Swarup
An important but little noticed feature of the elections in two major states of the Hindi belt has been switching over the old generation to the new one.

75 Years Ago

Class representation
THE Muslim League does not want merely class or communal representation, but preferential representation as well.

Challenges before the BJP
By S. Sahay

NOTHING seems to be going right for the BJP at present. The controversy over Bababudangiri is something it could have done without, especially after the shattering defeat of the party in the Delhi and Rajasthan elections and its failure to dislodge the Congress Government in Madhya Pradesh.

The trouble is that this supposedly disciplined party has no control whatsoever over the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and the Bajrang Dal, which have their own agenda in which the well-being of the Vajpayee Government does not seem to figure at all.

In fact, the grudge of the more radical elements in the Sangh Parivar is that, by putting the issue of the Ram temple at Ayodhya, a common civil code and the scrapping of Article 370 of the Constitution, in the back burner the Vajpayee Government has compromised with the party’s basic planks and, thereby, alienated its traditional supporters.

The BJP defeat in the three states in the Hindi heartland (Delhi, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh) is bound to encourage these elements to work for the restoration of the old postures.

That would be a short-sighted move. The background to the popularity of the BJP and its increasing presence in Parliament and the State legislatures needs to be kept in mind. By its blatant cult of what the BJP calls “minorityism”, the Congress was making the Hindus feel that, though in overwhelming majority in the nation, they were being treated as second-class citizens in their own motherland. The crunch came when Mr Rajiv Gandhi nullified the effects of the Supreme Court judgement in the Shah Bano case by amending the Indian Penal Code. It compounded its folly by opening up the gates of the Babri Masjid for regular puja, though the order for it was issued by the courts.

I had occasion to watch, in those times, how even otherwise liberal and sane Hindus were reacting to the Congress policies. Little wonder “garv se kaho hum Hindu hain” (proudly declare that you are a Hindu”) met with response from a sizeable section of the Hindus.

There was another factor that worked in favour of the BJP. The Congress was increasingly becoming corrupt, inefficient, and oblivious of people’s welfare. Power had gone into its head. The BJP, in comparison, appeared a disciplined party from which much could be expected. This perhaps explains why, retired generals, civil servants and others joined it or sympathised with it.

However, the Sangh Parivar failed to grasp the essence of the Hindu way of life: that it is not monistic. As a Hindu you are free to worship, one or the many. You may observe certain rituals or ignore it. Hinduism abhors proselytisation. There have been indeed reformist movements but various Hindu cults have co-existed. I cannot recall off-hand any destruction of masjids or churches by the Hindu kings.

Understandably, therefore, saner Hindus recoiled in horror when the Babri Masjid was wantonly destroyed, while the Narasimha Rao Government callously watched. The Congress paid a big price for it, but what is noticeable is that, in the next election, the BJP fared badly even in Faizabad, the district in which Ayodhya is situated.

I have been arguing all along that, while it may be possible for a party to build a base through sectarianism, the plurality in the country is such, that, for ruling, either the Centre or the States, there is no escape from a wider appeal to the electorates even in the first past-the-post system.

This implies that you cannot undo the past, especially where religious places are concerned. This means that religious places patronised by both the Hindus and non-Hindus should be revered rather than an attempt be made drastically to alter its character.

Look at Bababudangiri, which the VHP and Bajrang Dal planned to capture, but hastily changed back when faced with public opposition and court order. It is the highest hill in Karnataka. Hindu legend has it that the hill was what Hanuman dropped off after delivering the plant that was needed to revive an injured Laxman.

A muslim sufi pir, Bababudan, lived and died there. Thus while the Muslim consider the place as Southern Mecca, the Hindus have a mutt in the name of Dattatray, who is believed to have meditated there but later vanished.

Mr L.K. Advani did well to assure Parliament that the Central Government would ensure that the court order that the status quo be maintained would be honoured and that no attempt will be allowed to be made to alter the sanctity of the hill which is revered by both Hindus and Muslims. Fortunately, minus tension for a while, peace was maintained at the hill.

In fact, Bababudangiri should be a lesson to the BJP. Its earlier attempt to foist Saraswati Vandana in schools was misconceived. At any rate true vandana of Saraswati lies in removing illiteracy for which the BJP, as a party, or even when in power, has done precious little. The party must remember that the vahana (the mode of transport) of Saraswati is hans (dove), not ullu (owl). Would mere incarnation in her praise please Mother Saraswati when the country has more illiterates today than the total population at the time of Independence?

Vandana or erection of a temple is mere symbolism. This may be essential for a society at a certain stage of development. But then the society has to graduate to a higher level of religion, which is to serve society. A political party does not truly serve society by exploiting the symbolism, but missing the essence.

A spiritual person I had the privilege of knowing, Baba Bhagwan Ram, always insisted on building up character, than on constructing temples. Like the sages of the past, he insisted that the true temple was the human frame and true worship lay in worshipping the self-in the higher sense.

It is to be hoped that for its own sake, and for the sake of the society, the Sangh Parivar would put social harmony before sectarian worship. In this manner alone it can give the pride place to true Hindutva.

I must clarify that I am not at all impressed by the rhetoric of the Congress and others that the BJP is a communal party. This is a selfserving propaganda by the non-BJP parties (the Congress, the Leftist parties and the Rashtriya Jan Morcha) and should fool no one. At any rate how is casteism superior to communalism? Our political parties need to rise above both and make the plural Indian society truly secular, with a place for all shades of opinion and for all religions beliefs, for the common good of all.

by Harihar Swarup
New leaders, new agenda

An important but little noticed feature of the elections in two major states of the Hindi belt has been switching over the old generation to the new one. Ashok Gehlot, the Rajasthan Chief Minister, is just 47 and his counterpart in neighbouring Madhya Pradesh, Digvijay Singh is running 51. Winning for the first time since Delhi acquired a state assembly, the Congress government will be headed by a slightly older Sheila Dikshit. She is just 60 and not a “Dilliwali” in the real sense.

It is said there is no shortcut to experience in life. Paradoxically, both Gehlot and Digvijay Singh, have come to acquire more experience than Sheilaji. Gehlot’s membership of the Lok Sabha extends to 16 years and he has served in the governments of the three Prime Ministers — Indira Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi and P V Narasimha Rao. Digvijay Singh has established a record having been chosen the Chief Minister of the largest state of the union for the second term. Only two of his predecessors — Dr Kailash Nath Katju, the first Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh after the states’ reorganisation and Arjun Singh (widely known as Digvijay’s Guru) — could complete the full five-year term.

Both Gehlot and Digvijay symbolise resurgence of the young leadership in the Congress, having the mass base, leadership quality and dynamism. They are the leaders of the 21st century, all set to replace the old, degenerated and power-hungry leaders of the 113-year-old party. Both were among young leaders, handpicked by the late Rajiv Gandhi in his effort to build a new generation party; the Congress of 21st century. Both Chief Ministers have also little known facet of their now well-known personality.

Ashok Gehlot: He will be the youngest-ever Chief Minister of Rajasthan and this is for the first time that he has been elected to the state Assembly. Gehlot was elected to the Lok Sabha from the Jodhpur constituency when he was just 29. That was the year 1980 and since then there is no looking back for him. He will also be first OBC Chief Minister of Rajasthan known for its Rajas and Maharajas and their chivalry.

Mrs Indira Gandhi inducted the young man from Rajasthan in her government as Deputy Minister in 1982. People of Jodhpur elected him in 1984, 1991, 1996 and 1998 general elections. He was defeated only once — in 1989 — by Jaswant Singh of the BJP. Besides the Ministry of Mrs Gandhi, Gehlot was a member of the Rajiv Gandhi and P V Narasimha Rao governments having been elevated to the rank of Minister of State.

Besides acquiring a wide experience in administration, Gehlot has gone through the mill in the organisation as well heading the Rajasthan unit of the Congress twice. Cutting short Gehlot’s term in the government, Rajiv Gandhi sent him to head Rajasthan PCC in 1985 to revamp the state unit. The decision drew flak from the old generation leaders.

Narasimha Rao again rail-roaded him to Rajasthan in 1994 as state Congress chief with an eye on the 1996 general election. Gehlot had to give up his berth in the Council of Ministers. Since then he has been steadfastly striving to put the organisation back on the rail. The reward came last week when the Congress romped home with a massive majority in the state Assembly. The choice of Gehlot to head the state government was obvious though seniors also tried to throw their hat in the ring.

Few may be knowing that Gehlot belongs to a family of magicians and hails from the “Mali” community. His father, the late Lachman Singh Gehlot, was a well-known magician and his tricks have made him quite popular. In the princely houses of Rajasthan, magicians had acquired a special status and were source of entertainment in royal counts. The youthful Chief Minister of Rajasthan himself has learnt from his father the art of magic. He was a star campaigner for the Congress party. Did he possess a magic wand? This is the question commonly posed in Rajasthan in the aftermath of election.

Digvijay Singh: The resounding success in last week’s Assembly election was, perhaps, the finest hour for him. It was his personal victory and that too coming after all senior leaders had predicted virtual doom in the battle at the hustings. Digvijay single-handed carried on the campaign with an unmatched confidence and his success has changed the course of the Congress party’s destiny.

Arjun Singh has come to be known both as the political Guru and bete noire of Digvijay Singh and the youthful Chief Minister is said to have not only learnt the art of political brinkmanship from the former HRD minister but fine-tuned it. Arjun Singh’s acknowledged “guru” was the late D P Mishra whom some describe as the Machiavelli of Indian politics. It is generally believed that he acquired the art of politicking from Mishra but refined his crude manipulative methods by sophisticated techniques. On his part, Digvijay further perfected whatever his guru, Arjun Singh, had acquired from his Guru, D P Mishra.

The break in Guru-chela relationship came when Arjun Singh expected total loyalty; expected Digvijay to side with him in the revolt against P V Narasimha Rao. As Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh, possibly, Digvijay could not have obliged his guru. The gulf widened when Arjun Singh started pulling the rug from under the feet of his chela.

Unlike Gehlot, Digvijay belongs to a princely family of Madhya Pradesh known for its righteousness and self-respect. His father Balbhadra Singh was a popular ruler of tiny Raghogarh state, an ardent follower of Mahatma Gandhi and a devoted Congressman during the independence movement.

Digvijay is a mechanical engineer having been educated in Indore and a late-comer into politics. The noted cricket player, C K Naidu, was his hero during student days. He joined active politics in 1971 and the first office held by him was that of the President of Raghogarh Municipal Committee. His rise has been steady; elected to the state Assembly in 1977, re-elected in 1980 and became Minister of State in the Arjun Singh government and subsequently promoted to the Cabinet rank. He made his debut in the Lok Sabha in 1984 and was re-elected in 1991.

One of the dreams of Digvijay Singh’s mother was to see her son as Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh. She could not live to see the finest hour of her son having passed away in 1986. Perhaps, her blessings have helped Digvijay to be chosen the Chief Minister for the second time, thereby, establishing a record, say his family members.

Sheila Dikshit: Sheilaji, as she is popularly known, has watched politics closely for three decades. Educated at prestigious Jesus and Mary School and Miranda House, she married the veteran Congress leader, Uma Shankar Dikshit’s only son, Vinod Dikshit, an IAS officer of the UP cadre and became “bahu” of an orthodox Brahmin family. Her political education began the day she stepped in Dikshits house where politics was talked about all the time. Groups of Congressmen thronged Dikshitji’s house both in Lucknow and Delhi and she managed the household very efficiently, looking after the visitors, guests and top leaders. This was her first exposure to politics and Sheilaji, sharp as she is, learnt her lessons well.

The great 1969 split in the Congress was, perhaps, the biggest challenge to Indira Gandhi’s career. She relied on only a handful of her supporters for advice and strategy formulation and Dikshitji was one of them. His schedule became hectic and very busy and he needed a reliable secretary to help him. Having known everybody who mattered in politics by then, Sheilaji was the right person to assist her father-in-law. She managed her new assignment very well.

The late Rajiv Gandhi inducted Sheilaji in his government and entrusted her with the task of looking after PMO, political management and Parliamentary affairs. With years of experience, having worked with her father-in-law, she did the job well and became an influential minister.

The biggest tragedy of Sheilaji’s life occurred when her husband died suddenly following a massive heart attack while travelling from Kanpur to Delhi and the emergency medical aid could not be given to him. Vinod was then only 49 and left behind two children, a son and a daughter.

75 YEARS AGO

Class representation

THE Muslim League does not want merely class or communal representation, but preferential representation as well. The chief whip or spokesman of the League, Syed Ameer Ali, has been all along contending that the share of Muhammadans should be even more than justified by their numerical proportion and we find that this point will also be emphasised by the deputation of the League which will wait upon the Viceroy in a few days.

But can the British Government countenance or adopt the principle of preferential representation for one community? Is not that inconsistent with the time-honoured and sacred principles of British rule, viz., of equality of rights and franchises between all the sections of the people?

In fact, the principle of proportionate representation which had been so clearly laid down by Lord Morley and also by Lord MacDonnell was not only the only feasible basis of representation but does abundant justice to Muhammadan claims, and it is to be fervently trusted that government will stand to his guns in this matter.