Open Forum
New Delhi, 30 June 2010
Opposition BJP
SHORTSIGHTED & CONFUSED
By Prakash Nanda
Two developments have been in the news pertaining to the Bharatiya Janata Party
(BJP), the country’s principal opposition party. One is the “home-coming” of
former finance/external affairs minister Jaswant Singh, who was expelled from
the party 10 months ago for his controversial book on Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the
founder of Pakistan.
And the second was the recent tussle between the BJP and the Janata Dal (U), affecting
the fate of their ruling coalition in Bihar,
which goes to polls later this year. Though
news reports say the alliance is intact there is no clarity.
Both the developments have shown the
BJP in very poor light, particularly its “chintan”
(philosophy), and “chalan” (working
style). Certainly, as a party, the BJP is now miles away from what it was in
the 1990s, when it had caught up the imagination of the nation as “a party with
a difference”.
Let us take the case of Jaswant
Singh’s return. He was apparently expelled for his views on Jinnah, which the
party did not share. In the first place, whether one’s individual, and that too
academic, opinion on a person should be a sufficient reason for expulsion from
the party is debatable. In fact, if at all Singh deserved to be expelled, it
should have been for the widely shared view in Rajasthan that he, along with the
late Vice-President Bhairon Singh Shekhawat, did everything possible to ensure
the defeat of the BJP, in the last Assembly elections simply because they did
not like the then chief minister Vasundhara Raje Scindia. It is said that but
for Singh and Shekhawat, Vasundhara would have won a second term comfortably,
rather than losing it narrowly.
But having expelled Singh on the
Jinnah issue, what is the reason behind “inviting” him back? Singh says he has
not changed his views on Jinnah. Does that mean then that the BJP has changed
its views? If so, why has the country not been told about it? And if not,
then how could few individuals, howsoever senior they may be, “invite” Singh
back to the party without a proper or structured discussion in the concerned
party forums? This question is the all the more important, given the fact that
the decision to expel Singh was said to be BJP’s “collective” decision.
As regards the Bihar
imbroglio, the BJP’s indecisiveness is equally bizarre. Here, the party
has been literally humiliated by Chief Minister Nitish Kumar, who belongs to
the allied JD (U), seemingly over a non-issue – an advertisement displaying Kumar
and Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi together above a factual narration of
Gujarat’s friendly contribution towards Bihar’s
flood relief.
The “friendly” advertisement invited
“hostile” reactions from Kumar. He returned the Rs. five crore relief to
Gujarat, though quantitatively speaking, Gujarat’s
overall contribution in terms of men and material exceeded Rs. 20 crore. Kumar
also cancelled a dinner with the BJP leaders, assembled in Patna for a party meeting. What is most
humiliating, Kumar’s associates have threatened they would not want either Modi
or Varun Gandhi on the soil of Bihar for
electioneering.
The BJP’s top mandarins sat over
many a time to discuss the party’s line of action in Bihar.
It claimed as per reports that the alliance was alive and that it would not
“compromise on its dignity”. Arguably, any decision on how to deal with Kumar till
the elections is going to be tough. After all, BJP-JD (U) alliance is one of
the oldest in the National Democratic Alliance (NDA). Any additional time may
prove really costly for the party.
All told, Kumar is a wily
customer. He wants to cultivate the image of a “secular” leader so that
he gets the votes from the Muslims whose number is considerable in Bihar. He is still learnt to be in two minds on whether
to ally with the Congress, whose second most powerful leader, Rahul Gandhi, is
strongly inclined to court him. Though it is debatable how much of the Muslim
vote he will get given the fact that all his other opponents – Lalu Yadav and
Ram Vilas Paswan – also thrive on the Muslim votes, Kumar’s supporters,
particularly a section of the national media, will want him to emulate Orissa’s
Naveen Patnaik, who dumped the BJP on the eve of the last elections, to prove
his “secular” credentials.
Of course, secularism has been a
much abused concept in India’s
political parlance but that is another story. However, it defies one’s
imagination how Nitish Kumar can have “Rasgoola”
but will hate to touch sugar. He has had no problem in taking the BJP’s support
to remain chief minister for five years, but will consider Modi, a senior BJP
leader, untouchable.
Strangely, the national media has completely
downplayed some strange ways of Kumar’s
functioning. For one, he is a leader who does not believe in party democracy.
See the number of JD (U) leaders who have deserted the party in Bihar in recent
years and the manner in which he has humiliated some of the party veterans,
including former defence minister George Fernandes and former minister of state
for external affairs minister Digvijay Singh, whose tragic and untimely demise
came during the writing of this column (let me confess, it has been a great
personal loss; Singh was a long-standing close friend). Arguably, Kumar has
even surpassed Lalu Yadav in promoting his brand of casteism – the so-called
Maha Dalits and Kurmis.
What is more disturbing is the way Kumar
has handled the Modi issue. Without consulting his council of ministers, he
took a unilateral decision in returning the money to Gujarat.
Can any CM take a unilateral and personal decision pertaining to another State?
After all, he did not return Modi’s money; that money came from the “whole” of
Gujarat and had been given to the “whole” of Bihar.
In fact, Kumar’s behaviour reflects poorly on the federal structure and
functioning of the country.
What should, then, BJP do? The party
must realise that the alliance with Kumar has not done any good to the party in
Bihar. In 1996, the BJP was the senior partner
there and he has now made it effectively negligible. Indeed, the BJP should
have a second look at this concept of alliance politics. Be it in Uttar Pradesh
or Orissa or Haryana or in Bihar, the party
has become much weaker because of it. The same is considerably true in Punjab
and Maharashtra.
It is being forgotten that if the
BJP is the premier opposition party, it is primarily because of its performance
in Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Rajasthan and Gujarat. And here, the party is not only alone but under
the leadership of effective and competent leaders such as Yedurappa, Raman
Singh, Shivraj Chouhan and Modi.
It is only the so-called Delhi-based
national leaders of the BJP who will go to any extent of appeasing the
essentially authoritarian leaders of the so-called allies. They forget the fact
that these allies will come behind you when you have the strength. That was the
case in 90s. Consistent appeasement, on the other hand, not only makes the
party weak but also hurts its dignity.
Clearly, it is time for the BJP to
part ways in Bihar. But will its confused and
shortsighted leadership in Delhi
dare to do so? Highly unlikely, if the recent years’ record is any indication. ---INFA
(Copyright,
India News and Feature Alliance)
|