archive: Congress discovers nationalism!
Congress discovers nationalism!
Virendra Parekh
The Observer
June 26, 1999
Title: Congress discovers nationalism!
Author: Virendra Parekh
Publication: The Observer
Date: June 26, 1999
Introduction: In 1948, 1965 and 1971, Congress prime ministers gave
away strategic points, territory and PoWs in return for empty
promises. Blind with envy, weighed down with anxiety and restless for
being sidelined by events, Congress is levelling al sorts of charges,
accusations and allegations, just to remain in the reckoning. It is
only harming itself in the process. It is not just that its criticism
of the government does not wash. What it says now can and will
boomerang on it when the issues are discussed threadbare
Although reduced to a rump, the Congress struts and frets as if it
were the arbiter of the country's fate and the keeper of its
conscience. It reminds one of some porter or horseman in Lucknow
boasting of his aristocratic descent even while carrying on his
present, humble profession.
No one can accuse the Congress party of being inactive at a time of
grave national crisis. Its spokesmen have been issuing a spate of
statements virtually everyday to remind anyone who cares that they are
seized of the matter. And, for a change, it is trying to speak the
language of nationalism (a language it had forgotten for decades) in
an obvious bid to outdo the BJP on its favourite terrain. Even while
fully supporting the valiant action of the armed forces (what else can
it do?), it keeps picking holes and finding faults wherever possible.
"There has been an intelligence failure," we were told even as the
government ordered the army to drive out the invaders. "The
government is yet to realise the gravity of the situation" its
spokesman informed us when air force planes were pounding enemy
positions. For good measure, it has demanded the defence minister's
resignation and called for a session of the Rajya Sabha where it can
roundly berate the government for its 'inept' handling of the Kargil
issue.
All this may sound like legitimate concerns of a responsible
opposition party. The game, however, is given away when it accuses
the BJP of politicising a national issue by observing the Kashmir Day
on June 23. "it would be unfair to our jawans if the ruling party
tries to politicise their sacrifices", pontificates a party which
unashamedly exploited the victory of Bangladesh war in 1971 in
assembly elections in several states soon after the war. If the
government is determined not to let even an inch of the Indian
territory remain with the invaders, the Congress is even more
determined not to let the BJP get any political mileage from the
Kargil crisis in the coming elections. Hence all its nit-picking and
fault-finding. In the process, if the atmosphere is sullied by its
discordant noises, leading to a weakening of the morale of both the
people and the armed forces, the Congress cannot care less.
Congressmen continue to think of themselves as natural rulers of
India. They find it hard to accept the fact that when the country is
fighting an undeclared war, levers of power are controlled by others.
Even harder to digest is the fact that these others are doing the job
reasonably well.
The Congress knows from experience that any leader who acts tough with
Pakistan automatically becomes a national hero. The prospect of this
happening to Vajpayee must be very disconcerting to it.
Add to this the compulsion to sound nationalist. The foreign origin
of Sonia Gandhi has already become an election issue, whether the
Congress or the BJP wants it or not. The present aggression is bound
to make people wonder whether it is prudent to hand over the reins of
power to a person about whom they know nothing. In these
circumstances, It would be fatal for the Congress to look less
nationalist than the BJP.
And then there could be this advise from the PR experts: Nationalism
has always been the unique selling point of the BJP. Now is the time
to steal it.
Blind with envy, weighed down with anxiety and restless for being
sidelined by events, the Congress is levelling all sorts of charges,
accusations and allegations, just to remain in the reckoning.
Congress is only harming itself in the process. It is not just that
its criticism of the government does not wash. What it says now can
and will boomerang on it when the issues are discussed threadbare.
Consider, for instance, the charge of intelligence failure. There is
no doubt that we were caught unawares. There was arguably a degree of
lethargy and complacence.
However, according to Major General (retd) Afsir Karim, "the belief
that our intelligence agencies failed completely is not based on
facts. It seems that intelligence of special groups being trained in
Skardu was made available in April 1999. Apparently our assessment of
their intentions and mission went wrong. Our attention remained
riveted to their likely infiltration in the valley, a direct outcome
of the prolonged involvement of the military in civil affairs and
counter-insurgency operations in the valley." (The Times of India 4
June 1999).
Similarly, George Fernandes may be held guilty of saying things which,
whether true or false, he should not have said. But as the Lt General
(retd) Satish Nambiar said, there has not bee n any degradation in
terms of decision-making or in allowing the forces to take action (The
Sunday Observer 20 June '99).
Congress leader Natwar Singh may regard himself as a world class
states-man, but the fact remains that even without the benefit of his
guidance, the government was able to isolate Pakistan in the
international arena. Contrast it with the international perception
all through the decades.
And just how were things when the Congress was in power? In late
1950s, Pundit Nehru's government learnt of the Aksai Chin road only on
seeing it in a Chinese magazine. At the critical moment, Nehru balked
at the thought of using air force against the Chinese invasion. Under
Lal Bahadur Shastri, our patrolling of the Rann of Kutch was so casual
that Pakistan could establish posts in between visits of our patrol
parties. Under Rajiv Gandhi, at Sumdrong-Chu in the North-East, it
took us months to discover that the Chinese had been there for
months. It was during the Congress rule that Pakistan was able to
engineer a separatist movement in Punjab costing us 21,000 lives, and
Kashmir was all but lost to us in 1990-1996 due to an insurgency which
cost us 15,000 lives. And who connived at the infiltration of crores
of Bangladeshis?
Preparedness of the armed forces? We all know what happened in 1962.
About the present times, let Lt Gen Nambiar speak: "Our military
establishment has been quite rational in its projection of demands.
Whatever requirements have been projected are the minimum needed to
keep the armed forces of a country like ours in a reasonable state of
preparedness. Unfortunately, even the minimum requirements have not
been met, and those responsible for it are no longer accountable.
In 1948, 1965 and 1971, Congress prime ministers gave away strategic
points, territory and PoWs captured by our jawans with their blood, in
return for empty promises of good behaviour and friendship. The
present aggression on Kargil is mounted from Skardu. Our army had
captured Skardu in 1948. Nehru ordered our army to withdraw. Soon,
Pakistan came in and occupied it. The same thing happened with Haji
Pir Pass. If that is not the betrayal of martyrs, what is?
Ineptitude in handling the Kashmir issue? It was Nehru who prevented
Indian army from reconquering the whole Jammu & Kashmir by aggressing
to a cease-fire and internationalised the issue by taking it to the
United Nations against the advice of Sardar Patel.
It was again Nehru who complicated the Kashmir problem by granting the
state a special status under Article 370. In any other country, a
province like Jammu & Kashmir (with a different demographic
composition, coveted by a hostile neighbour and partly under foreign
occupation) would merit an extra-strong integration with the union, if
not permanent central rule. But Nehru did the opposite. Our people
and our jawans are still paying the price of the folly of this
visionary.
People's memory may be short, but it is not as short as Congress wants
it to be. They will certainly see through its pretence of nationalism
and its attempt to put even invasion of the motherland to a political
use.
Back
Top
|
