ELECTIONS '98
COMMENTARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ARCHIVES

Growing Differences

Families fall apart. Differences crop up. The cohesion over the years begins to wear out. It is, therefore, no surprise to see the gulf developing among the members of the RSS Parivar. But is this real or a facade? That is the question.

Madan Lal Khurana tried to raise the debate before resigning from the Cabinet. He said the Parivar members -- he called them pseudo-Hindus -- had given a bad name to the Vajpayee government. He said they had created an atmosphere of animosity against the minorities. The whip of discipline shut up Khurana. But he had already raised a pertinent discussion.

"If I were to say something, I would have to resign from the party," Khurana told me a few days ago. I had asked him whether he would make the explanatory statement, which the outgoing minister was entitled to do. Although he did not spell out the pressure, it is an open secret that he was quietened by BJP chief Kushabhau Thakre, who is an ardent follower of the RSS.

Khurana has not mentioned officially which members of the RSS Parivar he had in view. But he has otherwise made his unhappiness over activities of the Bajrang Dal and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, the two fanatic members of the RSS Parivar, clear. This still does not explain why he would have to leave his party, the BJP, if he were to name them or talk about their work in detail.

Whatever else it may suggest, it does indicate that the RSS does not allow Parivar members to criticise one another in public. This does not mean that the differences can be papered over. But as RSS ideologue Govindacharya said some time ago that "the understanding between the government and them (meaning the Bajrang Dal and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad) will come through talks."

He would have sounded credible if the differences had been ideological. But they are not over Hindutva, which the BJP owns as enthusiastically as other Parivar members do. The differences relate to what the Bajrang Dal and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad have been doing to harass and hound the Christians out. In fact, the burning of a missionary and his two children was the last straw on Khurana’s back.

Understandably, the BJP has to be equivocal in putting the blame on the two Parivar members because of its relationship with the RSS. But there is no reason why the BJP's allies, political parties who have secular credentials, should feel shy of saying that the VHP and the Bajrang Dal have whipped up communalism. True, the person to give a new edge to communalism and spread it to the countryside was L K Advani, now home minister. The results of his rath yatra through northern India some eight years ago are still visible. And today he is busy propagating the virtues of secularism in a pluralist India.

The fact that the coalition constituents have not come out openly against the Bajrang Dal and the VHP gives the impression that they are riding two horses at the same time. They do not want to lose their seat in the government by openly saying, something which the queen been, the RSS, may not like. On the other hand, they are keen on telling their voters, particularly the minorities, that they have not compromised with communalism in any way. This is merely shadow boxing. Had they been serious, they would have asked the BJP to denounce the two organisations by name. At lest Commerce Minister Ramakrishna Hegde of the Lok Shakti had the gumption to blame the Bajrang Dal and the VHP for damaging the image of the Vajpayee government. But he too stopped at that. He did not dare to say whose support was behind the two organisations.

The recent RSS conclave at Lucknow focussed on the Christians as if their community was doing nothing except bringing tribal Hindus to its fold. Who converted whom and how is a topic, which we can discuss till the cows come home. The question is: Why have the Bajrang Dal and the VHP taken up the task of 'reconversion to Hinduism?' Could it not be at the RSS bidding?

It is difficult to imagine otherwise because both organisations are nothing but the creation of the RSS. The BJP has developed an entity of its own over the years and the RSS has, for reasons best known to it, left the party alone. It is also possible that the RSS does not want to upset the applecart of the BJP-led coalition, which has a common agenda to pursue.

Hitting at the Christians has, however, evoked unfavourable opinion everywhere. The country’s reputation for tolerance has been damaged considerably. The RSS could not have used the BJP for the purpose. The Bajrang Dal and VHP fitted the role as they did not care about breaking the law or skulls.

What is disconcerting is that Khurana, after making some noises, has fallen silent. Even Vajpayee, after bemoaning the excesses committed against Christians, gave a clean chit to the guilty Gujarat government. This is the tragedy of liberals in the BJP.

Is the RSS following a dual policy, one expressed through Vajpayee’s condemnation, the other of bludgeoning Christians through the Bajrang Dal and the VHP to deter them from their missionary work. But the larger question is: Will the RSS allow Vajpayee to govern without interference? The manner in which the Bajrang Dal and VHP are egged on by the RSS to behave irresponsibly shows it wants to maintain its pressure on Vajpayee.

Basically, the BJP faces a situation similar to the one it did in 1979 when its predecessor, the Jana Sangh, was part of the Janata Party. The Jana Sangh refused to sever its ties with the RSS, although it had given an undertaking to Jayaprakash Narayan, the founder of the Janata Party, that it would do so. How could the Jana Sangh, the tail, wag the body, the RSS? It has a long-term policy to make India a Hindu Rashtra and convert Hinduism into a monolithic religion.

The liberal lot in the BJP is willing to go along with the philosophy of Hindu chauvinism. But it does not like the efforts to polarise the nation through forcible reconversions and the attack on the minorities. The liberals seem to have realised that the destruction of pluralism may well end up in the destruction of India.

The real target of Hindu fundamentalists is Vajpayee. He is trapped, but not tamed. Once in a while he shows his own self to convey that he does not like all that the RSS is doing. Still it is difficult to imagine that he will ever revolt against the RSS or establish a separate identity. The RSS appears to have convinced the liberal segment, including him, that its groundwork has brought the BJP to power. The fact is that the RSS would not have made any headway if Vajpayee had not been available to it.

History may one day record that Vajpayee destroyed the liberals within the BJP by staying quiet or giving full reins to hardliners like L K Advani and Murli Manohar Joshi. There is no doubt that the RSS is strong enough to establish its authority. One, however, fails to understand what glory Vajpayee is seeking before joining issue with the RSS. Were he to challenge Hindu fundamentalists, he would become an alternative to the Congress because his personal image is still high. If he dithers, as he has been doing, he would certainly go downhill. This may mean the death of liberalism in the BJP.

Kuldip Nayar