archive: Vajpayee's truth : Akhand Bharat
Vajpayee's truth : Akhand Bharat
Sandhya Jain
The Pioneer
August 17, 1999
Title: Vajpayee's truth : Akhand Bharat
Author: Sandhya Jain
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: August 17, 1999
When the first BJP-led coalition was sworn-in last year, Congressmen proposed a
funny though inane cliché - that Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee was the 'right
man in the wrong party'. The fact that it sounded witty and no doubt riled the Sangh
parivar must have lent it legitimacy in the eyes of 'secular' commentators and social
scientists, for I have heard it repeated mindlessly over the past year.
In one sense, the cliché was convenient, because those ideologically opposed to the
BJP could invoke it to explain their inability to find blemishes in Vajpayee's public
career. Today, this ruse is being adopted by intellectual fellow travelers who are
privately aghast at the idea of an impressive BJP performance at the polls; they
eulogize the Prime Minister and denigrate the RSS.
In a fundamental sense, however, the cliché obscures the reality. Mr Vajpayee is a
genuine RSS product, espouses its worldview, and was handpicked by Deen Dayal
Upadhyaya himself to be his political heir. His potential as a possible Prime
Minister was recognized long ago, for which reason he was always cherished by the
parivar, despite differences of perception on some issues. Most differences, it
should be emphasized, have been of nuance rather than substance. For instance,
Vajpayee's horror at the forceful reclamation of the Ram Janmabhoomi by Ram bhakts
cannot honestly be interpreted to mean that the devotees should relinquish claim to
the site.
I mention this to draw attention to the fact that it is Mr. Vajapyee who, following
the recent aggression in Kargil, subtly revived Akhand Bharat, the dream of the old
Jana Sangh. Before critics demur, I may point out that this does not mean reversing
the Partition (which no sensible Indian desires), but restoring the boundary of 15th
August 1947. The BJP, it may be noted, has been consistent in this demand, and during
the Narasimha Rao regime, was able to inspire Parliament to pass a unanimous
resolution favouring restoration of Pak-occupied Kashmir to India.
Most people today may not even remember the term Akhand Bharat. But there is no
denying the fact that it has gathered new potency as a deeply experienced nationalism
grips the country, fueled by images of a bitter battle fought on lonely, snow-swept
peaks. This is the reason why there were no takers for the view, floated tentatively
by pro-Pak pacifists after the conflict formally ended, that the LoC be converted
into a legal border. In fact, while Kargil created widespread admiration for the
Prime Minister's leadership, the decision to confine the conflict to the Indian side
of the LoC also produced profound dissatisfaction. There was an unstated conviction
that India had missed a golden opportunity to recover PoK and restore the country's
territorial integrity.
Mr Vajpayee may have sensed this frustration, but his decision not to hold talks
with Pakistan until it stopped aiding and abetting the militants, only partially
placated public opinion. It took the unexpected shooting down of the Atlantique (a
purely local assessment and decision by the concerned air force station) to satisfy
the nationalist Indian's craving for a forceful and convincing display of power.
Perceptible observers have noted a sharp quickening in pro-BJP sentiment since the
incident, and a corresponding dissipation of the disappointment at not crossing the
LoC.
I must add that this disappointment would not have adversely affected the government
in the forthcoming elections because the Congress has utterly failed to read the
pulse of the nation. Today Sonia Gandhi does not look like a foreigner only because
of her Italian origin and heavy accent. She looks like the foreigner she is because
she does not experience the powerful bonding that girdles the nation post-Kargil; nor
has she shown the slightest sensitivity to public sentiment in this regard. When
public memory is still burning with the visual impact of the war and the highly
emotive return of the bodies of slain soldiers, her statement that Kargil is not a
victory of the leadership that steered the nation through this difficult hour strikes
a jarring note. The Left parties and intellectuals also made noises about the fanning
of 'jingoistic nationalism' when the bodies came, but quickly fell into discrete
silence after sensing the public mood.
Sonia Gandhi, however, in her much publicized first press conference, failed to
appreciate that the conflict is still smouldering. Pakistan's increased surveillance
and intrusion that led to the shooting down of the Atlantique last fortnight
underlines its determination to continue its offensive in some form or other.
Certainly continued support to militants was anticipated, but the frontal assaults on
security forces have given the situation an entirely new dimension. Nearly a dozen
attacks have taken place since the end of the conflict, and it is clear that there is
a concerted attempt to unnerve and demoralize those charged with the responsibility
of guarding the country's internal and external security, and create panic in society
as a whole.
At the same time, the Pakistani opposition has denounced the Nawaz Sharif-Bill
Clinton deal on cessation of hostilities and declared that a new government would not
feel bound to honour it. The long term implications of this statement for Pakistan
and Nawaz Sharif is something that that country will have to contend with; but we in
India will have to be extremely vigilant against fresh adventurism. Sonia Gandhi,
however, seems entirely oblivious of the dangerous new dynamic developing in the
region. Her spin doctors have told her that because the Bofors gun performed credibly
on the Himalayan ranges, she can extricate her family from the corruption charges
that accompanied that deal. Hence, this is what she pitched for in her maiden press
conference, heedless of the spectacle she made of herself and her party.
Political developments since Kargil have brought out a clear correspondence between
the nation's external and internal landscape. Those who do not understand the
equivalence between well defended borders and hindutva's soul-liberating agenda speak
foolishly of the deferment of "contentious issues" by the BJP coalition. The truth is
that, historically, the forces that battled for an honourable space for India's
civilizational ethos in the public realm have already carried the day, and there can
be no turning back of the tide.
What remains is to set things right. We must end the sustained neglect of our
security and police forces by five decades of non-national leadership. No other
country in the world has an army strapped for spares or a police force not equipped
with fast cars and mobile communication. Then, Congress should be brought to account
for the hordes of non-Indian 'votebanks' that have turned first Assam, and now the
entire north-east and West Bengal into virtual tinderboxes. The entire border with
Nepal is lined with militants' training camps.
Indians are peace-loving and do not espouse theories like the 'clash of
civilizations,' but I would like to ask our secular friends what other cultures and
ideologies seek to throttle in India if not the Hindu ethos? Those virulently opposed
to the "communalism" of the BJP must explain why the 'secular' India of the
Nehru-Gandhi's and other like-minded secularists faced infiltration and assault
(after all, BJP has been in power only in the last one year). These are difficult
questions. But to evade the answer that India is under threat because she is Hindu is
to once again invite the minimization that has debilitated us so grievously, so long.
Back
Top
|
