BJP’s Understanding of the Political Power Dynamics
History is deep enough to tell us that anarchists in a country often tend to become the rulers after catapulting the regime. The most wanted ones eventually climbed the top of the pyramid. Be it Vladimir Lenin, from the Russian Revolution, or Mao Zedong of the Chinese communist revolution. George Washington for the USA, or Ruhollah Khomeini for the Islamic Republic of Iran. The methods to gain public support/force might be unique, but one fact remains intact throughout history: anarchists of today will be the majesties of tomorrow.
The post-independence Bharat or India has witnessed several instances of the aforementioned fact. Starting with the era of emergency from 1975–77. It was enacted by Indira Gandhi when the Allahabad High Court found her guilty of electoral malpractices in the case The State of Uttar Pradesh v. Raj Narain. Several opposition leaders were arrested; Vijayaraje Scindia, Jayaprakash Narayan, Raj Narain, Morarji Desai, Charan Singh, Jivatram Kripalani, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, Lal Krishna Advani, and Arun Jaitley, to name a few. It is no surprise that all collectively defeated Indira Gandhi in the 1977 general elections with the formation of the Janta Party. They bagged 295 out of 542 Lok-Sabha seats, a clear majority for the Janta Party.
Again, political turmoil unfolded in 1990.
“Let them try and enter Ayodhya. We will teach them the meaning of the law. No masjid will be broken.” Mulayam Singh Yadav had declared this in October 1990, opposing the Ram-Rath Yatra of LK Advani. Advani was then arrested in Bihar’s Samastipur by Lalu Prasad’s government on October 23, 1990. A week later, on October 30, the campaign saw a massive gathering of karsevaks (volunteers) in Ayodhya. As they tried to march towards the Babri Masjid — intention not clearly declared, a clash erupted between the karsevaks and the police. By noon, police received orders from the then Chief Minister Mulayam Singh Yadav to open fire at the karsevaks. The firing led to chaos and stampede. Police chased down the karsevaks in the streets of Ayodhya.
Another round of clash erupted on November 2, when the karsevaks returned and resumed their march towards the Babri Masjid, but this time, with a different tactic; the karsevaks comprising of women and the elderly would touch the feet of the security personnel deployed to prevent the demonstrators from marching ahead. Stunned by feet-touching gestures — two days after the firing incident — the security personnel stepped back, and the karsevaks moved forward to do a repeat. The security personnel saw through the tactic and warned them. The karsevaks would not deter. The security forces responded by opening fire the second time in three days.
This act of anarchy in some way helped the BJP in the 1991 state elections, a landslide victory with 221 out of the 425 seats in the state assembly. Eventually, the CM Kalyan Singh resigned on December 6, 1992, following the Babri Masjid demolition.
These events aided with the psychological opening incurred by the LPG reforms of 1991 became some of the major factors in the 1998 general elections for the victory of the BJP.
Apart from the Indian examples, there are hundreds of such instances across the world that reinstate the fact: that anarchists of today will be the majesties of tomorrow.
The current ruling party, BJP seems to have understood this tactic. Civil/religious groups attacking each other in riots is a quite different aspect as compared to the action of the state against the miscreants. Why is it so? Let’s understand with a few incidents:
An incident occurred on the morning of February 27, 2002, in Godhra of Gujarat, two coaches of the Sabarmati Express, S5, and S6 were set ablaze by a Muslim mob. Almost 70 Hindu pilgrims and karsevaks returning from Ayodhya were burnt to death. This sparked fears of communal violence in Gujarat. Since Gujarat Police didn’t have enough numbers, the then CM of Gujarat, Narendra Modi contacted the three neighboring states to aid the Gujarat police by sending some of their police force to help. Ashok Gehlot, the CM of Rajasthan, Vilasrao Deshmukh, the CM of Maharashtra, and Digvijay Singh, the CM of Madhya Pradesh, all denied any help to Gujarat. As a result, the Gujarat Police were asked to stay low for a while.
A civil/religious clash is different because the government is not a direct participant in it.
There’s another important observation; the BJP came into power in 2014 primarily because people have had enough of the corruption scandals under the Indian National Congress. The BJP backed by the resounding success of the Gujarat-Model seemed to be the only viable option for the voters. The tactic of painting oneself as an anarchist or a victim was soon adopted by the opposition and their supporting groups. Not just in these two riots, but much before that. This can be witnessed in their acts and movements post the 2014 general elections. The Intolerance Campaign, Award Waapsi, Lynching Narrative, Beef Campaign, Azadi Campaign, Rafael Misinformation, Scared Muslims Narrative, Anti-CAA Delhi Riots, Terrorists’’ Sympathizing, and the Farmers’/Middlemen Protests. These movements portrayed some groups as the victims and the state as the enemy.
A strategy of the BJP similar to 2002 Gujarat was witnessed recently during the Anti-CAA Delhi Riots and the middlemen/farmers’ protest-turned-disturbance. The government took no step against the rioters in both cases. They expected civil/religious groups to retaliate against the miscreants. Since the public neither had an interest nor the will to engage with the rioters, everything escalated quickly and resulted in the deaths of several innocent civilians and security forces.
I wanted to bring this perspective to the attention of as many people as possible. This was through my lens of viewing things. Feedback will be appreciated.
Thanks.
