Author: Arun Nehru
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: August 26, 2002
Elections in Gujarat have been postponed
indefinitely. I for one am not surprised, given the recent 'muddy' remarks
of Chief Election Commissioner JM Lyngdoh, and his 'body language' during
a three-day visit to the State. Both had clearly indicated what was to
come. It is as yet difficult to analyse the future implications of the
Election Commission's decision on the communal front.
If we look at the ground realities
in the country as they exist, we will doubtless identify a monstrously
impersonal system that is completely insensitive to individual suffering.
At the same time, we delight in our persecution mania whenever the opportunity
presents itself. Look at any field. We have a wide variety of choices:
Communal violence, crimes against women which includes (mis)treatment of
widows, dowry-related deaths and violence, rape and violation of human
dignity (as we have encountered on a Bombay train a few days ago, where
a minor was raped in full view of immobilised train passengers). We have
accidents and fires in which thousands of people die, even as the Government
and judicial machinery creaks into action, the mandatory 'time span' of
which adds to the misery of the victims.
The Gujarat violence is sad and
must be condemned-as must be Assam, Delhi, Punjab and Jammu & Kashmir
where thousands have perished over the last decade. But should we confuse,
indeed conflate, these tragedies with the electoral process? Have elections
ever been postponed in Punjab, Assam, Tripura or in Delhi? Were elections
not held in the bloody aftermath of Indira Gandhi's death, when communal
violence claimed the lives of thousands of innocent people? Is postponing
elections a substitute for tardy relief work? The secular-non-secular attitude
has created an indefensible schism in Gujarat-splitting it into majority
and minority interests-and 'delays' in taking recourse to the political
process will only make the situation worse for all concerned.
There are many 'grey' areas in politics,
and sometimes it is prudent to act with restraint when dealing with them.
The decision of the CEC on the issue of the Gujarat elections have been
debated by legal experts. But political issues rarely die away in this
manner. Pro-minority experts have fired their missiles and now the pro-majority
experts are thinking of reviving the Gaurav Yatra. It is very naïve
to think that either group is acting from some higher ethical motive. Eventually,
it ought to be the people of Gujarat who determine their future by being
allowed to make a political choice. In a democracy, this is done through
the majority vote.
Fortunately, the J&K elections
are to be held on schedule. In my view, the Central Government did the
right thing by encouraging the efforts made by the Kashmir Committee team,
led by Ram Jethmalani, to persuade Hurriyat leaders to throw their hat
into the electoral ring. By refusing to participate in the elections, Hurriyat
leaders expose their own limitations in terms of popular support. Their
avoiding elections makes it obvious that they prefer the comfort of never
being tested as representatives of the Kashmiris, and that they receive
financial and other assistance from across the border as a return for this
favour. Sadly, the only leader with a mass base-Abdul Ghani Lone-was killed
for his pro-election views.
Elections in Kashmir will be held
under the glare of the media-both national and international-and hundreds
of unofficial observors, including foreign diplomats. It will therefore
be very difficult indeed for anybody, however powerful, to rig the elections.
The only negatives in this scenario are the Hurriyat and the Pakistan-sponsored
terrorists who will attempt to spread fear and uncertainty, given that
a large turnout will expose their limitations.
I am surprised though that the EC
found everything 'normal' in Kashmir, a State with an over two lakh-strong
minority of Hindu Pandits who continue to be refugees in their own country
and live in relief camps in squalid conditions. But then, there are compelling
arguments for everything and you always have a few expert lawyers giving
a few additional special twists to the situation. However, the reality
is that conflicts increase whenever selective decision-making takes place.
If we take the electoral record of the past 55 years into account, then
the decision on Gujarat will certainly appear very 'selective'.
The country is in 'election' mode,
since polls are due in many places. It is time to speculate on the future
patterns of governance. Media surveys are all very well, and one may grant
them some measure of credibility. But it is very early days when it comes
to determining the winners and losers of electoral contests. There are
marginal shifts within five-year periods. Election trends in J&K will
not indicate very much about the national scene, but Gujarat is important.
The situation in the latter is muddied since voters have to sift through
and evaluate 'secular-non-secular' platforms. Political parties are in
the habit of tagging those who vote for particular political formations.
Elections in several other States
like Rajasthan, Maharashtra, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh and Delhi will indicate
trends for the Lok Sabha elections in 2004. There will be new alliances
and new groups depending on the issues involved-look at the vice-presidential
election where 10 per cent of the MPs' vote for Bhairon Singhji came from
unexpected quarters. Opposition unity fell apart when several members of
the Opposition chose to back the NDA's nominee. Consider also the recent
controversy involving Pramod Mahajan in the Shivani Bhatnagar case. The
Congress sadly chose to target Mahajan, yet Mulayam Singh came to his rescue!
Consider also that Mandal has, in
the name of social justice, divided the majority vote along caste lines
and that the minority vote is quite decisive. The CPI(M) have West Bengal
and Kerala. These States have a minority vote of 20 per cent, followed
by Uttar Pradesh and Bihar with 15 per cent. The 'secular' argument and
the Gujarat divide may well put caste in the background, and that may well
be the decisive trend in the coming elections. It should be remembered
though that there are few saints in the political game. The media itself
is fragmented, and fairly committed to either side. While it may be difficult
to determine winners and losers in the immediate future, the fact is that
tension levels will increase and that the necessary ingredients for conflict
already exist.
Political battles must ideally be
fought with political issues. Sadly, the vendetta ridden politics of the
past 30 years is becoming institutionalised. Leaders wildly accuse, arrest
and jail each other in the pursuit of power. Coalition politics coupled
with the numbers game ensures the flexibility of thought and movement from
one party to another. Sadly, the country is brimming with talent, yet we
are allowing cynicism and decay to ground the political system. Twenty
policemen are killed in violence in Tripura, but does anyone have the time
to even absorb the fact that hundreds, maybe thousands, have died in the
Northeast? Have we the time and the inclination to think of the affected
families? Does anyone remember the name of the Tripura Chief Minister who
has to take corrective action?
