Author: Sandhya Jain
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: June 15, 2004
The BJP rank and file's seething
resentment against the nominations to the Rajya Sabha seems to have taken
the leadership by surprise. Still in denial mode about the causes of the
May 13 debacle, it sought to make amends with the half-hearted nomination
of former Disinvestment Minister Arun Shourie as third candidate from Uttar
Pradesh. This was marred by the graceless caveat that he hustle his own
votes, which further inflamed the cadres and forced a swift retraction.
While there is nothing wrong if a party with surplus votes puts up a candidate
in the hope of his scraping through, it is unbecoming that a dazzling performer
of the previous regime is bypassed in favour of outsiders like Ms Najma
Heptullah and Mr Lalit Suri.
Readers of this column would be
aware that I do not normally make personal comments, but as the BJP's Rajya
Sabha nominations are linked to the larger issue of post-poll introspection,
this unpleasantness cannot be avoided. As four- time Deputy Chairperson
of the Rajya Sabha, Ms Heptullah conducted her office well. But she owes
her entire career to the Congress party, and left it only when it failed
to support her burgeoning ambitions. As she has no political base or popular
support in her community, BJP cadres are legitimately aggrieved over her
selection.
The preference for Sanjay Gandhi
acolyte Lalit Suri over industrialists like Rahul Bajaj leaves a bad taste
in the mouth. Nor can one fathom the largess showered upon Ms Shakuntala
Hegde, widow of former Karnataka chief minister Ramakrishna Hegde. The
lady evinced no interest in politics after her husband's demise, and his
party had to invoke his dancer friend Pratibha Prahlad to take over its
leadership.
Heavens would not have fallen if
defeated ministers, Messrs Murli Manohar Joshi and Yashwant Sinha, stayed
at home. Dr Joshi brought needless controversy to the HRD Ministry without
meaningfully furthering the national cause. He took care to bestow key
posts upon known Left and anti-Parivar academics, and mindlessly agitated
the middle class on the issue of IIM autonomy. Mr Yashwant Sinha was adequate
as Foreign Minister, but was never acceptable to the Bihar unit, which
will feel aggrieved that it could not put up a candidate of its choice.
The nominations of party chief M
Venkaiah Naidu, former Finance Minister Jaswant Singh and general secretary
Pramod Mahajan are unexceptionable. But overall, they betray a desire on
the part of the top leadership to close ranks and evade the bitterness
that could arise from honest introspection into the causes of the recent
poll debacle.
This is reflected in the divergent
views expressed by former prime minister Mr Atal Bihari Vajpayee and the
party president, Mr Venkaiah Naidu, who is currently facing the flak in
Delhi. The BJP rose to national eminence on the crest of a campaign for
cultural nationalism (Hindutva), and a plea to end pampering minorities
at the cost of the majority community. It lost the 2004 elections because
voters perceived it to have abandoned both the civilisational and secular
realms.
Let me explain. When the BJP formed
a coalition Government, it agreed to a freeze on three issues: The Ram
temple at Ayodhya, Article 370, and the Uniform Civil Code. But court hearings
kept the Ayodhya issue alive. Having formed the Government, the BJP could
have withdrawn the cases framed against its leaders after demolition of
the Babri structure, the way the Baroda dynamite case against Mr George
Fernandes was withdrawn when the Janata Party came to power in 1977.
Instead, it allowed the cases to
continue, giving credence to the view that it was culpable. Moreover, it
frequently shifted its position on the issue, giving the Muslim community
a virtual veto on the future of the temple. Even worse was its failure
to take a decisive stand after court-ordered excavations proved that the
Babri structure was built over a pre-existing temple.
The NDA's wish to not reopen Article
370 did not justify the BJP's callous disregard towards the Kashmiri Pandit
community, and its insensitivity towards rising casualties in Jammu &
Kashmir, particularly when families of policemen and soldiers were attacked.
Ms Mehbooba Mufti's shameful bias towards the militants could have been
used to initiate a nationwide debate over the relevance and desirability
of Article 370. A similarly enlightened approach on the issue of the Uniform
Civil Code would have been fruitful.
The BJP opted for early general
election after impressive victories in Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Chattisgarh
on a developmental platform (bijli, sadak, pani) convinced it that it could
win elections without mentioning controversial issues. But it confused
the wood for the trees.
In all three states, the state leadership
worked hard to articulate peoples' concerns and aspirations. This was not
so in Delhi, where the BJP was routed. Delhi was reeling under power shortage,
inflated power bills, and an unresponsive administration; but the State
BJP simply failed to articulate people's grievances on any issue. Delhi
still has the worst roads and drainage system in the country; and there
is no move towards rainwater harvesting which can solve the water crisis
forever. Thus, Ms Sheila Dixit could get away with claims of "Delhi shining"
and reward Delhi citizens with threats of differential taxation for every
car owned by a family. There are plans to bill people for parking on an
hourly basis-as per international norms we are told-when we do not enjoy
international payscales! Power rates have gone through the roof.
The true lessons of last years'
mini-general elections-to win you must connect with the people-were lost
on the BJP. The party holds Mr Chandrababu Naidu particularly responsible
for its ouster from South Block, because farmers' suicides led to a rout
in Andhra Pradesh. But the suicides had begun in Mr Naidu's first term
itself, and the State BJP neither visited the ruined families nor took
up the issue of farmers' plight with the State Government.
In Bihar, the BJP State unit never
effectively raised the issue of deteriorating law and order. In West Bengal,
it could have launched a public movement on irregularities in the voters'
list alone. In Tamil Nadu, the BJP lazily endorsed the Congress thesis
that alliance with a Dravid party is mandatory, and made no attempt to
articulate people's concerns. The Hindu Munnani protested at renewed conversions
following the peremptory withdrawal of the anti-conversion law; the BJP
kept mum even though conversion is a live and emotive issue in the south.
It has also failed to speak up against rising atrocities towards Dalits
and women, and has taken no cognizance of a virtual slave trade in women
in many parts of the country. As for child abuse, the party does not know
that this exists.
Far from introspecting, there is
an unseemly attempt to make a scapegoat of the Gujarat Chief Minister.
It is sad Mr Vajpayee could speak of the riots without mentioning the horror
of Godhra, and without appreciating the sensitivity with which Mr Modi
handled the Akshardham atrocity and the Jagannath Yatra. If Mr Vajpayee
truly wishes to understand the causes of his party's defeat, he should
begin by pondering why the BJP gave unwarranted power to a rootless individual
like Mr Lalji Tandon, who lacked even the grace to be apologetic when his
birthday celebrations caused a tragedy in which more than thirty poor women
lost their lives.
