India: Rough family dynasty in politics

Varun Gandhi, who was arrested under National Security Act (NSA) in India, is quite at the peak of media coverage in South Asia for his hate speech against Muslims.

Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) vice-president Venkaiah Naidu in a recent press statement said Varun Gandhi was kept in a small cell, where he could not see anyone. Inhuman treatment was meted out to him. He was harassed and tortured in prison.

"Gandhi has been implicated under NSA under a well-knit plan and conspiracy of BSP and Congress. It has been done to keep him out of elections," the saffron leader said after meeting Varun Gandhi at Etah district jail.

Commenting on Varun, Amulya Ganguli in Rediff news wrote, “Move over, Narendra Modi, The new Hindutva mascot, Varun Gandhi, is here. Going by the requests that are pouring in from the BJP's candidates for Varun's appearance at election rallies, his stock is now evidently higher than that of the former Hindu hriday samrat.

“It isn't only his crisp articulation of the pet peeves of the saffron audience which has enhanced his appeal. There is also the dynasty factor. For a member of one of the most celebrated of the country's secular political families to voice the innermost feelings of the BJP's core group of supporters is a novelty beyond compare. The use of the common contemptuous term for circumcised Muslims by the great grandson of Jawaharlal Nehru is obviously too thrilling to be missed.

Nothing that Modi says can match this -- not even his spiteful slogan of hum panch, hamare pachis underling the exponential breeding potentiality of a Muslim and his customary four wives. Modi also faces the difficulty of being the holder of a constitutional position, which must make him wary of letting his true emotions run away with him lest his entry to the US should be prohibited for a longer term.

“True, Modi is known more for his deeds than words. The pogrom of 2002 is his badge of distinction in the eyes of the Hindutva lobby. Even in supposedly Leftist-oriented Kolkata, historian Tapan Ray Chaudhuri was aghast to hear Modi being praised at parties of the affluent for showing the Muslims their place.

“However, after leaving an indelible mark on the Gujarat and national scene, Modi has been holding his tongue.

“But Varun faces no such problem. He is a newcomer, who has arrived with a bang following in the footsteps of other saffron rabble rousers like Uma Bharati and Sadhvi Rithambara. Since he has been arrested, his appeal will go up since it will further convince Hindutva aficionados that a member of the majority community cannot even say what he wants to -- a disadvantage underlined by the Shiv Sena in its praise of Varun.

“The bull run, however, may not last as long as the BJP may want. The reason is that, first, there will no more secret recordings and hazy visuals of Varun's first few speeches when he spoke freely. Instead, there will be any number of TV channels dogging his footsteps and planting their lights, cameras and microphones as close to him as possible so that not one of his words is missed.

Their very presence, too, will be a constraining factor in the matter of the exercise of the freedom of speech. The party, too, will no doubt advise caution. As it is, Modi is persona non grata to nearly all of the BJP's 'secular' allies. Even in a state like Orissa, the BJP has had to drop its earlier plan to start the party's campaigning with Modi lest it antagonise its former ally, whom it apparently expects to return to the fold after a while. There is no question, therefore, of Varun being sent there, or to Bihar, where Nitish Kumar lost no time to voice his displeasure at what the young man had said.

“Such built-in restrictions in the National Democratic Alliance will compel Varun to campaign only in the BJP-ruled states -- though not in Punjab in view of his unflattering references to Khalistan. But, speeches by him only in Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Chhatisgarh and such states where only the BJP runs the show will be like preaching to the converted even if he occasionally takes the risk of transgressing the limits of decency. In all likelihood, therefore, Varun's foray into politics may turn out to be a one-shot affair just as Rithambara hasn't been able to repeat her blood-curdling call for a communal holocaust -- one last khoon-kharaba -- in recent years.

“However, one possibility cannot be discounted. In case the BJP fares poorly in the elections, it will no longer feel obliged to act under the various restraints imposed by the NDA partners and the legal system.

“A second defeat after 2004 will mean that the BJP will have to resign itself to playing a much longer period out of power than it thought before the last general election. A longish spell out of power removes the shackles of responsible conduct. It is worth remembering that the BJP discovered its faith in Ram after sinking to its lowest point in electoral politics in 1984 when it won only two Lok Sabha seats.

“It was then that its fiery sanyasins and uninhibited demagogues like Vinay Katiyar and Ashok Singhal appeared on the scene to galvanise the Hindu voters. That it had a considerable measure of success was evident not only from its first step in the corridors of power in Delhi just over a decade after 1984, but also from the anti-Muslim diatribes which float around in the cyber world to underline the durability of its support base. In the event of it stumbling in this summer's electoral hurdles, there is every possibility, therefore, of the BJP unleashing Varun, Pravin Togadia and others to recover lost ground.

“It goes without saying that their endeavours will have the backing of not only the Shiv Sena and the Hindu Mahasabha, which have already expressed their support to Varun, but also of the RSS, not to mention the even more combative VHP and the Bajrang Dal. There will also be no one from the old guard to check this charge of the virulent brigade. While L K Advani will begin to fade away after a defeat, Atal Bihari Vajpayee is too ill to try to restore sanity in the organisation.”

The speeches that got Varun Gandhi censured by the Election Commission and imprisoned by the law could only have been made by an Anglophone Indian. In these speeches, all delivered in Hindi, he promised to deal summarily with troublesome minorities. He spoke of Muslim candidates with fearsome names like Karimullah and Mazharullah, he encouraged non-Hindus to migrate to Pakistan, he compared Muslim candidates to Osama bin Laden, he spoke of a “mad Sikh” candidate who he claimed was fighting the election as an agent of a Muslim and described the Hindus who supported him as traitors to the Hindu community. He described Muslims as “mother-fuckers”.

Varun Gandhi has two sets of answers for his critics. On the record he claims that he didn't make those statements. Off the record, the justification for these remarks is that he said what he did because he wanted to reassure the Hindus of his constituency in Pilibhit, who, according to him, were living in a state of fear. He wanted to leach this fear of Muslim terror out of them and consequently went into rhetorical overdrive because that's the idiom that works in Indian politics.

It's a rhetoric that both mother and son do very well. After Varun Gandhi's arrest in Pilibhit, Maneka Gandhi accused a Muslim policeman of instigating violence at the time of the arrest. Even by the non-exacting standards of Indian electoral politics, this was a nakedly inflammatory allegation, but for Maneka and Varun Gandhi there is a Chinese wall between the metropolitan India that they live in and the provincial world in which they campaign, so nothing they say in the latter can be allowed to disturb their persona in the former.

And, how the aunt of Varun Gandhi, another member of the Nehru Dynasty in Indian politics, Sonia Gandhi reacted to the hate speech of her 'rebel nephew'? Congress president Sonia Gandhi on April 2, 2009 ordered her party spokespersons to maintain “political restraint” while attacking the Opposition, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Worried that targeting personalities like Varun Gandhi may be counter-productive, Sonia is learnt to have asked her colleagues to focus more on issues and not on specific people.

Many critics consider Ms. Sonia Gandhi's latest statement on Varun Gandhi issue as 'extremely diplomatic and tolerant' while some others say, 'Sonia has always been consistently appearing to Indians as the most moderate and very tolerant leader. She, instead of giving instigation to her party-men as well supporters, cashing the Varun Gandhi issue, continues to try to keep her Congress Party aloof from this controversy.

Possible reason behind Sonia Gandhi's statement is she fully understands the inner minds of the Indian Hindus, who hold extreme hatred for Muslim, Sikhs, Jews, Christians and other religious minority groups. She also understands the fact that rise of religious minority forces in politics should be checked for the sake of ensuring the continuation of the Nehru Dynasty in Indian politics.

Commenting on Varun issue, TIME magazine said, “The spectacle in India is riveting: virulent anti-Muslim diatribes spouted by a pedigreed and ambitious young Hindu politician who shares the surname of the world's foremost apostle of non-violence and who is descended from the Prime Minister who founded modern India as a secular state to serve the country's multiplicity of faiths. Since early March, Varun Gandhi, 29, has been the scandal of India's political class after he called for, among many things, the hands of Muslims to be cut off if they are raised against Hindus, their throats to be slashed, their population to be culled by strict birth control. His words triggered India's stringent National Security Act, and for days the young Gandhi was a fugitive from the law. The episode has highlighted the ugly feud that has split India's historic First Family for years.”

It further said “The current political firestorm started as Varun was preparing to make his political debut in India's general elections, which are now less than three weeks away. The young man seemed to be consciously raising one of the most controversial episodes in modern India's history: Indira Gandhi's Emergency Rule from 1975-1977, when she — with Sanjay as her chief advisor — ran the country on authoritarian lines, ruling by decree. One of those edicts led to forced sterilization to deal with India's then huge population growth rate. Varun Gandhi allegedly referred to it in his virulent rallies in the first week of March by saying that the BJP "need to pick them (Muslims) up, one by one, and sterilize them.”

“Many Indians are appalled not only that a descendant of Nehru is espousing such a political perspective but that his name and actions besmirch that of the great Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, who was assassinated by a Hindu extremist in 1948. While the Mahatma was not a blood relation of the Nehrus, a popular story has the philosopher of political non-violence, who was Indira's godfather, allowing her fiance, a young Zoroastrian lawyer originally called Feroze Shah Ghandi, to restyle his surname as Gandhi, thus attaching prestige to a mixed marriage many Hindus would not have approved of. Priyanka Gandhi, Sonia's daughter, said that her cousin Varun's comments were against the traditions her family had "lived and died for." There might have been a bigger political spectacle if Priyanka's brother Rahul had been entered as a possible Congress candidate in the coming elections, but their mother nixed that suggestion.”

Indian Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh has termed Varun's remarks as 'very unfortunate'. But, he in the next line reminded people that Nehru Dynasty is the custodians of secular India.

What a farce! When a young leader from India's worst ever fanatic Hindu political party made extremely offensive remarks on the religious minority, another segment of India's political fate, the Congress, which is also 'owned' by Nehru Dynasty as well, continues to either minimize Varun's hate speech issue or even tries to remain silent on this matter, fearing reaction from the majority voters in the country

Rise of religious extremism is a great concern worldwide. But, unfortunately, till now, Islam and Muslims are only picked by regional and international media as lone responsible for religious extremism and terror. 'Islam' is entangled with the term of 'terrorism' so precisely that, anyone in the world would consider every Muslim as a fanatic, terrorist and minority oppressor. Such one-eyed perception is not only politically biased but a gross injustice to the Muslim population in the world.

In my personal life, I have encountered several Muslims in India and elsewhere in the world. Some of them although are senselessly fanatics, most of them are moderates while at least a few are extremely moderate and promotes inter-faith understanding even by taking risk of their lives.

Although India proclaims to be a secularist nation, it has a past track record of severe oppression and virtual elimination of the Jewish population in Cochin; murder of Sikhs and massacre inside Golden Temple in Punjab; Demolition of Babri Mosque and Hazrat Bal Mosque; rape of scores of Muslim, Sikh, Christian and Jewish girls and women by the fanatic members of Bharatiya Janata Party, VHP, Bajrang Dal and others; Grabbing of properties belonging to religious minority groups throughout India.

In Gujrat (Godhra), thousands of Muslims were brutally murdered, hundreds raped just because of their religious identity. The 2002 Gujarat violence describes a series of communal riots between the communities of Hindus and Muslims that took place in the Indian State of Gujarat between February and May 2002. But, critics also believe that, the massacre in Gujrat was a result of continuous instigation by religious fanatics belonging to both Hindu and Muslims.

The riots occurred at the Godhra train burning. The train had left Godhra Station and it was forcibly stopped and attacked by a 500 strong weapon carrying Muslim men that targeted one of the coaches containing the Hindu religious pilgrims and burnt them alive. 58 Hindu pilgrims, 23 men, 15 women and 20 children perished (In September 2004, a panel appointed by the central government and headed by former Supreme Court judge UC Banerjee to probe the Godhra train fire concluded that the fire was accidental). This incident was the flashpoint that started the communal Gujarat violence.

In September 2008 the Godhra Commission confirmed that there was an attack, by a Muslim mob. Going further, the report claims that one Hassan Lalu had thrown burning objects into the train and 140 litres of petrol had been used to set the train on fire, adding that stones were thrown at passengers to stop them from fleeing. According to official figures tabled in the parliament, more than a thousand people were killed (790 Muslims and 254 Hindus) in the violence after the train incident. More than one hundred and fifty thousand people were displaced (about 100,000 Muslims and 40,000 Hindus).

Organisations such as Human Rights Watch criticized the Indian government for failure to address the resulting humanitarian condition of people, "overwhelming majority of them Muslim," who fled their homes for relief camps in the aftermath of the events. Many of the investigations and prosecution of those accused of violence during the riots have been opened for reinvestigation and prosecution. According to an official estimate, 1044 people were killed in the violence - 790 Muslims and 254 Hindus including those killed in the Godhra train fire. Another 223 people were reported missing, 2,548 injured, 919 women widowed and 606 children orphaned. About 100,000 Muslims and 40,000 Hindus were in relief camps.

The large-scale, collective violence has been generally been described as riots or inter-communal clashes. The perpetrators of the violence as well as Sangh parivar leaders and the Gujarat government maintain that the violence was a spontaneous, uncontrollable reaction to the Godhra train burning. Going by the numbers, the vested interests have termed it a massacre and an attempted pogrom or genocide of the Muslim population, emphasizing that the violence was largely directed against defenceless people, indiscriminate with regard to age or sex and alleging that it was pre-planned, organised and aided by the local authorities and political leaders.

India's political detiny possibly is already struck within the camps of Congress and BJP, while one is already headed by the Nehru Dynasty the other may now also come under the same grip if Varun-Maneka duo can turn into 'neo-idols' of India's Hindu voters.

I personally do not find any justification as to why largest democracy like India should get hostiled into the ring of family dynasty. There were glorious leaders in India outside the Nehru Dynasty like Mahatma Ganghi, Lal Bahadur Shashtri, Veer Sevarkar, Sarojini Naidu, Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, Sardar Vallobbhai Patel, Dr. Rajendra Prashad, Moulana Abul Kalam Azad, Subhash Bose, Gopal Krishna Gokhale, Dadabhai Naoroji, Chandrashekhar Azad, Bhagat Singh, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar etc, while in today's India, there are great leaders like Jyoti Basu, Dr. Manmohan Sigh, Pranab Mukherjee etc.

Being a proud land of gigantic personalities like Gautam Buddha, Guru Nanak, Mahavir, Sri Aurovinda, Swami Vivekananda, Mirza Ghalib or Ravindra Nath Tagore, India should be the real land of peace and religious harmony. It should make a journey afresh towards real democracy by breaking the chains of family dynasty as well religious madness.