Problematic politics-10/10/2010

By Meghnad Desai, 10/10/2010

Problematic politics

Javed Akhtar said something very important the other day. As a Muslim, he said, he could not be secular. Secularism was a debate among Hindus. Muslims were just Muslims. He should have added, it is not people who have to prove their secularism, but leaders of political parties. It is not a matter of ideology, but of opportunism.



After the Ayodhya verdict, the real tragedy of Indian politics stands revealed. The great masses of India stayed calm, took the verdict in their stride and went on with their daily life. It is the political parties which are in a nervous state. This is because for people, religion may be a simple matter, but for political parties, it means vote bank. The so-called secular parties are trying hard to calibrate whether they should play hardball and say Muslims have been badly done by or to play a mild statesmanlike role and say all are happy. The problem is not faith or even the judgment, but the forthcoming elections.

It's the Congress who has the biggest problem. There are some in the party who still swear by Nehruvian secularism. For them, religion has no role in politics and any mention of it in practical matters is just irrational. This leads this faction to question why the judges pronounced on Hindu faith in a legal decision. Yet the matter was settled three years ago when the Law Minister of UPA 1 admitted in the Supreme Court that the Government believed in the existence and godhood of Ramachandra in the matter of the Rama Setu.



Most of the Congress members mouth the secularism platitude, but only to keep the SP and the RJD away from Muslim vote banks. After Nehru, secularism became asymmetric. Religious sensitivities of Muslims were to be scrupulously honoured. Salman Rushdie's Satanic Verses was banned. The Danish cartoons of the Prophet were denounced. The Congress secular rationalists did not then say that there is some support for Rushdie's questioning some verses of the Koran as being of dubious authenticity. There is an ongoing debate (most recently in Egypt between the Coptic Church and Islamic experts). One could have said that there is no ban on depiction of the Prophet in the Koran itself; indeed there cannot be since the Koran is the word of God. It is only one sentence in the Hadith which is quoted in support of the ban and even then Shias do not accept the ban. Coins with the Prophet's image too were around until five centuries after his death.

Still it is politic to accept such sentiments if it will keep peace. If so, why not the same with Hindu irrationalities, such as the Ayodhya birthplace belief? And if we are converging to accept the irrationalities of every religion in order to preserve peace, then where is the dividing line between the Congress and the BJP? Is secularism merely a battle for Muslim votes or is it a defining principle?



The BJP also finds it very hard to play moderate. Its leaders could have offered to build a mosque in the same breath as they hailed the chance to build a bhavya mandir. But they too seek to secure their Hindu vote bank rather than seem reasonable.

If only the Lucknow judgment would help political parties set the childish battle about secularism aside, we could have real politics in India. The fake ideological divide is wasting a lot of energy. Yet, the need for a government of national unity is urgent. China is looming large in both economic and in military terms. India needs to catch up with China in both these spheres. China is at India's doorstep in Baltistan with a modern infrastructure while India yet has to build a railway link to Kashmir after sixty two years. China has built several high speed tracks in recent years. India has none. If India is to realise its demographic dividend, it needs a military style attack on educational provision.

The fragmentation of Indian politics began in 1989 with Mandalisation. It continued with the Mandir/Masjid dispute. Now is the time to end both. India needs strong national parties to be in charge at the Centre.

Source: The Indian Express