BJP's catch 22 with Ramdev

June 10, 2011

Ramdev’s theatrics have got the nation hysterical at a point of time when any moral high ground against corruption is sweeping the nation. The BJP has extended its support to the self-styled Bawa, initially tacit and then explicitly, and there is a general perception in the collective consciousness that Ramdev is playing into the hands of the BJP. However, the BJP that is going all out to support Ramdev and in turn hopes to revive their lost political ground is equally apprehensive of Ramdev’s theatrics.

A large section of the BJP leaders believe that Ramdev is not worth trusting and the way he took a U turn with the Congress, he is quite capable of doing the same with the BJP as well. Requesting anonymity some of the BJP leaders admit that since the party is a divided house with various line of thoughts—Advani line, Sushma line, Gadkari line, Jaitley line, but no party line; it is serving the purpose of Ramdev and the party in return is seen to be gaining in the short term. They believe the consequences in the long term can be very costly to the party’s fortunes.

The return of Hindu hard liners like Uma Bharti back to the party and with Uttar Pradesh assembly elections in sight, a section of the top BJP leaders are of the view that Ramdev can prove to be an ace up their sleeves. Though aware of Ramdev’s own ambitions, in the cost benefit analysis they feel it will take quite some time for Ramdev to float his own political party and by then the BJP can reap the benefits before dumping him.

However, not all in the BJP feel the same. The claim to train youngsters for yoga militia has not gone down well with the RSS. The Hindu hardliners believe that by getting into every district to raise cadre is the kind of road map that can make RSS insignificant and hence they are uncomfortable with Ramdev. After all, it would hit them hard if a parallel Hindutva cadre is raised by Ramdev. There is unanimous view among the hardliner Hindutva brigade that Ramdev is neither a natural ally nor his over ambitious streak will make him stick to the ideology of the BJP-RSS in the long term.

Some of the bitter critics of Ramdev in the BJP camp assert that any extended support to Ramdev will amount to creating a Frankenstein’s monster, whose support base suggests that he will eventually grow at the cost of the BJP only. That was precisely the reason why the backroom boys of the BJP preferred a soft dismissal of Ramdev’s yoga militia call by asking its Muslim face Shahnawaz Hussian to say that Bawa’s Ashtra-Shastra (weapons) are his vaani (sermon).

This happened on a day when the BJP leader Sushma Swaraj rushed to Hardwar to announce full support of the party and Sangh Parivar. After all, the BJP does not want to miss the opportunity to show solidarity with a yoga guru whose theatrics have carried the educated middle class in urban India. This has been traditionally the BJP vote bank. And hence the party can’t afford to miss it. But the voices of dissent in the party suggest that it can lead to a significant dent in its traditional vote bank as well.

However, there are very little choices left for the party which is trying hard to overcome the fact that they could draw little mileage despite of a series of scams and scandals coming out in the UPA government. Ramdev episode is seen as the last refuge by the party where internal bickering have led to significant loss of ground even among the fanatic supporters.

The BJP is equally conscious of the fact that the other pole of fight against corruption has maintained a distance with them. Anna Hazare & his team have not allowed the BJP to share dais on the issue and steal the show. They have instead gone to the extent of making it overtly clear that if Ramdev has to join them, he has to distance himself from the party sponsored protest. How can the principal opposition party not be a part of a protest that has been in the media spotlight, of late?

This inherent confusion and dilemma added to the fact that the central leadership of the party is a divided house, has led the BJP to officially support Ramdev. But the back room boys are working overtime to plan out a possible fall out. These may be early days for the final cost-benefit analysis, but the BJP is definitely in a dilemma over support to Ramdev. This catch 22 situation of the BJP is actually eroding its own vote bank, many of the party strategists believe. 

Hey Ram...Save Rama from his fanatics

October 2, 2010

Immediately after the Ayodhya verdict over Ram Janmabhoomi Babri Masjid, a young man’s chat completely turned me off. “Sir Hindu Jeet Gaye” (Hindus have won)…This was not just a statement, rather reflected the thought process of a generation whom we expect to be progressive. I was all the more ashamed by the tenacity of this idiotic statement since it was coming from an educated person who is also a qualified lawyer. Legality of the judgment and ethics & plurality of the nation apart, the statement reflected an undercurrent of the psyche which still believes India should not move ahead of the medieval act that happened on the fateful day of Dec 6, 1992. 
While the country eagerly awaited the verdict on Ayodhya, it was heartening to see the vocal class of India pleading peace and harmony over religious bigotry. If various social networking sites were any indication, the mood of the nation seemed to be in favour of moving ahead of the controversy over temple & mosque that has seen the turnaround of India’s polity in the last two decades. However, the big question remained: Will it be the same goodwill after the verdict? After all, a win-win solution for all the parties (consciously calling them parties and not religion) seemed to be only a wishful thinking.
However, while the questionable verdict was accepted by and large by the nation with an appeal for moving ahead, stray and loose comments in-between has got alarming proportions. It is true that 2010 is not 1992, an entire generation has been exposed to a different and progressive society; there is no devilish P V Narsimha Rao, conspirator L K Advani or idiotic Kalyan Singh at the helm. But then what is more dangerous to the humanity in general and plural character of the nation in particular is the thought & ideology than the individuals.
Coming to the ethics of the dispute and legality of the judgment, I wonder had it been the other way round then whether the fanatic Hindus (who are still vocal with war cry) would have agreed for moving ahead? Moreover, if it is Hindu victory (as believed by a few educated idiots) then why the hell is Hindu Mahasabha challenging it in the apex court? I am myself a devout believer of Lord Rama and believe that he is very much part of the nature, hence exists everywhere.  After all, Sanatan Dharma and Vedic Living advocate the worship of even trees of Peepal, Banana and others. The fact of the matter is that Lord Rama’s existence and reputation is today more in danger from his own followers than the followers of other sects fighting over the Babri Masjid rights.
I am equally perplexed by the judgment which, according to me, raises more questions than answers the given dispute. Of course, the three bench judgment itself is divided and a clear answer was only a wishful thinking. However, one wonders whether the illegal demolition of the Babri Masjid has been legalized by the judgment.  What would have happened had the mosque not been demolished as yet? Had it then been a legal sanction to the demolition of a religious shrine? What about the constitutional assurance to the minorities that all the religious structures should stand the way they stood at the time of independence?
But I suppose the jurisdiction of the court was confined to the title rights over the land. Under the given circumstances, with Archaeological Survey of India findings also inconclusive, the honorable judges confined their decision over the title rights of the land only. However, the socio-political nature of the dispute demanded that the state should have intervened over the issue to not only address the issue but also set a precedent.
Had there been a timely state intervention, it would have saved Lord Rama being victimized, traumatized and de-glorified. May be a national monument on the disputed site would have done no harm to the reputation and international image of India. It would have also acted as a deterrent to the lumpen fanatics who think Ram Janmabhoomi judgment is the run-up to Krishna Janmabhoomi.    Most importantly, India would have really moved ahead in the true sense of the term.