Reining in fringe forces

The Bharatiya Janata Party’s national headquarters at 11, Ashok Road, New Delhi, was the most unlikely place to celebrate Christmas in 2002 amid the heat generated that year by sectarian violence in Gujarat. The quiet event when boys and girls sang Christmas Carols went almost unnoticed.

Performers came from New Delhi’s Fr Agnel School, a co-educational private institution, and an Ashram run by Catholic Priests and Brothers of the Society of St Francis Xavier. That BJP veteran Lal Krishna Advani went to a school in Karachi, run by the same organization, helped establish the much-needed rapport and sooth, in a modest way, frayed nerves.

Unlike Muslims whose vocal groups go political and get into protest mode, the Christians have by and large retained an apolitical profile. It helps them play peacemakers. Another Christian body in the national capital played a similar role that has proved more decisive and defining. The Syro-Malabar Catholic Church invited Prime Minister Narendra Modi to its function on February 17 to celebrate the elevation to sainthood of Father Kuriakose Elias Chavara and Mother Euphrasia.

The Christian organisation’s representatives had approached Modi last November, when ‘Ghar wapsi” (homecoming) organized by Hindu groups was being talked about. When the subject came up, Modi reportedly told them: “Don’t believe media reports.” But there were developments that could not be ignored. Besides conversions, five churches and one Christian-run school came under attack in New Delhi alone. They clearly impacted the outcome of the Delhi assembly elections.

With conversions and vandalism threatening to become his political Achilles’ heel, Modi used the occasion to fight back the perception that his government is silent and inactive on acts of religious intolerance to say that every individual had an “undeniable right to retain or adopt” any faith. “We cannot accept violence against any religion on any pretext, and I strongly condemn such violence. My government will act strongly in this regard,” he said.

It was Modi’s unequivocal and first statement against campaigns that have been disturbing the communal peace in the country. His silence on such actions by groups associated with the Sangh Parivar, had attracted global criticism, denting his image and that of the government. “My government will ensure that there is complete freedom of faith and that everyone has the undeniable right to retain or adopt the religion of his or her choice without coercion or undue influence. My government will not allow any religious group to incite hatred against others, overtly or covertly. Mine will be a government that gives equal respect to all religions,” he said.

Modi said equal respect of all faiths was an integral part of the Constitution, but it also had “roots in the ancient cultural traditions” of India. “This principle of equal respect and treatment for all faiths has been a part of India’s ethos for thousands of years. And that is how it became integral to the Constitution,” he said, adding: "To retain or to adopt any faith is a personal choice."

In January, US President Barack Obama’s invocation during his India visit of the Indian Constitution in the context of religious freedom had created a flutter. Two Union Ministers, Arun Jaitley and M Venkiah Naidu, sought to play down the events as ‘aberrations.’ Name-calling by some rightwing bodies only made Obama reiterate his caution against India falling prey to sectarian politics, adding that Mahatma Gandhi would have been “shocked” at what was happening.

Economist magazine did it earlier, and in the wake of Obama’s observations, New York Times wondered if Modi’s ‘silence’ should be taken as consent, since he too had been nurtured in the Hindutva culture. Modi has now spoken in clear terms. “We will not allow any minority or majority group to propagate hatred against any community overtly or covertly. Equal respect for all religion should be part of the DNA of all Indians.” He stressed that his mantra was `development’.

Once Modi spoke, the mood changed. Jaitley said: “These attacks are unacceptable aberrations and there is no space in India for such incidents and people.’’ And Naidu, who had earlier proposed a law to prevent ‘illegal’ conversions, said the union government has no plan to introduce any such law. “If someone converts from one faith to another by choice,” he asked, “what is the problem?” Naidu also conceded that the talk of Hindus having four or five children to ‘balance’ the perceived baby boom among the Muslims and that of Muslims luring Hindu girls into marrying as part of a “love jihad” was “not liked by the people.”

One discerns from all this a tussle within the Sangh Parivar, between the government and organisations close to the BJP, between the moderates and the hardliners, between those who want to de-link governance from ‘Hindutva’ ideology and – this one is going to be contested – between those who want to move forward into future and those who want to stay back in the past.

The last contention is argued by Vishwa Hindu Parishad leader, Pravin Togadia, who reportedly asked anyone to “open pages of history book” and see that “Hindus have been converted in the past.” Assuming that is so, even assuming that those conversions were forced, is it for a government, its ideological guides and foot soldiers to change that past in this century by conducting acts that have no sanction in law?

Modi has reiterated his ‘development’ mantra for everyone to note. His principal political aide and BJP President Amit Shah met the mentors of the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS) soon after. The moot point is, will it be heeded by the conservatives within his political fold?

The hard line voices have gone quiet for now, but for how long? Experience during the earlier NDA era was that Atal Bihari Vajpayee was constantly targeted for his economic reforms and his liberal approach to issues. While those at the top in his government may remain careful and correct in their speeches, Modi will have to guard against utterances of the middle and lower rungs with past record of being religious rabble rousers, who tested the limits of law and propriety with their virulent remarks.

A government that cannot ensure the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution equally to all its citizens will quickly lose its political legitimacy and representative character. Modi, most certainly, knows that.

By: Mahendra Ved