Gujarat Election: Dangerous Portents

By Jayanti Patel

The intensely followed election in the western state of Gujarat, India, is over and its results out. The state had been the site of horrific communal violence in early 2002, in which over 1,000 people, mostly Muslims, were killed in retaliation for the carnage at Godhra, in which 58 died when a train carrying Hindu supporters of a Ram temple at Ayodhya was set ablaze. The role of the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government and its supporters like the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bajrang Dal during that agonizing period had already exposed their fascist character to the world. When the elections were declared, it was hoped that people would reject these fascist forces and sanity would return. Sadly, that was not to be. The BJP has not only returned to power under Chief Minister Narendra Modi, but has increased its majority. Apart from the possible long-term ramifications, these results in themselves are perturbing and augur ill for the future. Furthermore, the issues that were given precedence during the election campaign, and the response of the voting public, show trends dangerous to India’s democracy, its survival as a nation state, and to hopes for the development of a just and civilized society.

BJP Rule

It was clear from the dissolution of Gujarat’s assembly and the demand for elections within three months of it by the BJP that it was planning to take advantage of the poison of communal hatred, fear and religious frenzy which had become pervasive in the wake of the Godhra incident and the subsequent riots. In the previous election, the BJP’s slogan had been “freedom from fear, starvation and corruption”. In this election, they were not even referred to in passing, and for obvious reasons: fear was widespread, large sections of the population were facing starvation and corruption had already come to be legitimized. Hence any mention of governance, let alone good governance, was to be avoided.

The BJP’s “governance” has been more conspicuous by its absence. Its efforts at relief following the devastating earthquake of 2001 had been severely criticized (in fact it lost all the seats in the worst affected area of Kutch, including those of sitting ministers). The party’s attempt to claim success in bringing water from the Narmada Project were scarcely persuasive as the Congress Party was widely known to have been responsible for much of the development of the project. The communal riots, which continued for three months, had severely affected Gujarat’s economy, as well as causing untold human suffering, and leaving thousands homeless. The burden of debt had skyrocketed. Public life stood totally disrupted. Political bickering within the BJP had increased, and the state government’s lack of effective response to (and reported actual encouragement of) the mayhem of death and destruction unleashed by the mob, mainly against Muslims, had been widely condemned. Indeed, a nine-member tribunal inquiring into the Godhra violence declared that Modi “is liable for prosecution for genocide for refusal to take any preventive measure to protect the lives and properties of minorities in the state”. Despite his oath of office, Narendra Modi and his BJP colleagues have shown scant respect for the principle of equality irrespective of creed enshrined in the Indian Constitution. Yet none of this has deterred people from voting Modi and the BJP back into power.

Election Strategy

How was such an election victory achieved? It seems astonishing that a government which encouraged murder, rape, collective killings, destruction, burning and the plunder of houses and shops, far from hiding its face in shame, on the contrary passes it off as a form of glory (gaurav). Those who opposed and condemned these barbarous acts, those who pointed their fingers at the guilty, became branded as anti-Hindu and pro- Muslim, as the enemies of Gujarat and of India. And this openly brazen propaganda became widely accepted – an example of a blatant lie repeated frequently enough to be swallowed by people as truth.

To spread such a belief effectively, it was necessary to suppress any feelings of guilt. In this context, the following comments were widely heard: “the mivans [a derogatory term for Muslim in Gujarat] had become too overbearing... It was necessary to teach them a lesson...Why should we be at the receiving end all the time?...Congress and others have appeased them too much...They are wrongly supported and pampered by the secularists...All Muslims favour Pakistan”. Naturally, where such a psychological climate prevails, the politics of hatred would acquire legitimacy even if of a dubious kind. Modi not only took advantage of these beliefs but used his propaganda machinery to reinforce them.

Despite a postponement of the election date, Modi’s strategy of keeping alive anti-Muslim feeling and maintaining its equivalence with anti-Pakistan feeling in the minds of Gujarat’s Hindus was helped by the terrorist attacks on Akshardham and other temples, which he lost no opportunity in exploiting. A fatwa by a Muslim organization exhorting Muslims to use their vote against communalist forces was widely publicized by the BJP, which responded with a highly effective counter- campaign. Even on the morning of polling day, media images of Muslim voters were used to whip up a massive Hindu response. The voter turnout was a record 63%.

Propagation of Communal Hatred

The greatest issue of concern regarding this election is that the agenda of the party that was voted into power in the state contains no indication of any policy of governance or economic programme related to the real needs of the people. The slogan offering removal of fear and eradication of starvation and corruption having

been shelved, there remained only a one-point programme: the dominance of Hindu nationalism, and unflinching acceptance of this dominance by other communities in India. Here, there is no scope for tolerance, equality, or working together towards building a nation. There is no talk even of progress, economic development, or the uplifting of the downtrodden. Yet the extraordinary fact is that this is not a programme of the BJP; neither is this a programme of India’s Prime Minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee or his hardline Home Minister, L. K. Advani. It is the programme of the VHP and its leaders, such as Pravin Togadia. Hence it could be concluded that this was not the victory of the BJP but of the fundamentalist Togadia. Indeed, it must be seen not as the victory of a particular political party but of the forces that advocate religious fanaticism, that advocate exclusion and the dominance and ascendancy of one group over others. This election result has strengthened such forces. And while Modi was skilful in utilizing the terrorist attacks in his election propaganda, the fact remains that the opposition failed to respond effectively. Groups opposed to communal enmity failed to reach the masses and arm them with the understanding that is the only defence against communal hatred.

The Congress Party had based its election strategy around traditional caste loyalties and was the dominant political force at the village Panchayat level. Although caste divisions in Gujarat are becoming blurred, they have been exploited effectively in previous elections. But in this election they were not the decisive factor. The force of the caste system has diminished in society, but communal loyalty has taken its place: the Congress Party had failed to gauge correctly the strength of anti-Muslim sentiment pervading the people’s psyche.

Challenging Communalism

Following their victory in Gujarat, the Hindu nationalists have been heartened in their aim to spread Hindu dominance throughout India. Their threats against the secularists who stand in their way grow more aggressive. It is clearly imperative to understand the foundations of their ideology.

Communalist forces, whether Hindu or Muslim, are not concerned with development or the eradication of poverty. They are against equality, progress, and the building of a modern society based on universal human values. They are inimical to democracy, modernization and secularization. They strive to maintain and strengthen traditional divisions and orthodoxy. They profess faith in the authority of religious texts and rituals and manipulate religious faith by exploiting religious causes such as that of Ayodhya and inciting people to violence in the name of religion. They are therefore strongly opposed to rationalism and freedom of thought. In their strategy of “divide and rule”, they are the real inheritors of the mantle of India’s former colonial masters.

In fighting these forces, education plays a central role. Democratic and Humanist values must be spread among the masses. To challenge aggressive organizations such as the VHP effectively, all democratic, rationalist, egalitarian and secular groups must develop a coordinated programme and use a variety of strategies. For the protection of democracy, for the preservation of our culture, for economic development and the realization of a peaceful and humane society, there is no escape from this fight.

Prof. Jayanti Patel is President of the Indian Radical Humanist Association, and has specialized in collective social violence studies.