16 December 2012, 12:32 PM IST
It's become the commonest defence the BJP puts up when it is attacked on its role in the 2002 Godhra riots. That the Congress is no different and is guilty of an even bigger carnage during the anti-Sikh riots in 1984; hence it has no rights to point fingers at it. No Congress spokesperson has been able to hold his head up and point out the difference. However there is a big difference. The difference is not in the scale of the two incidents (both were similar), but in the way the two parties have responded politically post the events.
Without doubt, both pogroms were reprehensible. Any organized activity of powerful political groupings using the state's powerful machineries against common people has to be so. Both the parties are guilty of genocide. Both the parties have tried to shield the main accused. The Congress has succeeded in doing so, only because the incident happened a long time back when media wasn't so powerful and wasn't able to exert as much pressure on the government as it can now. Also, without the internet, it was difficult to mobilize public opinion as powerfully as it is today. But since 2002, thanks to the massive growth of the media sector, the Gujarat government's role in the Godhra matter was never allowed to be buried. The pressure from the media made it impossible for the authorities to sit still and do nothing. And once the judiciary became active, it was impossible for the state and the cops to get away with (literally) murder.
However post the incidents, both political parties have responded very differently. The Congress has tried to make amends (this post point out how); as a result, the Sikhs have largely forgiven the Congress. But the BJP has made no amends at all. In fact, it has gone the opposite way and made Godhra the centerpiece of its political strategy in Gujarat and elsewhere. Modi's innings as Gujarat CM began with Godhra. There is no question of him abandoning Godhra. Or apologizing for it. Maybe when he moves to the national stage he will do so. For now, he is happy to enjoy the love and affection his fellow Gujaratis have showered over him for.
How has the response to the two parties been different? The Congress apologized to the Sikhs. In public and in action. Sonia Gandhi made Manmohan Singh the PM even though no one would have given him that chance. The Sikhs felt assuaged. It was the Congress's way of apologizing; by handing over the most powerful position in the country to a Sikh. Of course, there were political reasons that Sonia had for doing so; but she grabbed the chance. Of course, Manmohan Singh's brilliant record as a bureaucrat; his courageous reforms under Narasimha Rao; his intellectual prowess; and his apolitical nature all made him the "natural" choice. In making Manmohan Singh the PM, Sonia hit two birds with one stone. Not only did she give the nation an able PM, she also offered an olive branch to the Sikh community.
The Sikhs forgave the Congress, though they never forgot the carnage itself. Since 1984, the Sikhs in Punjab voted the Congress to power twice for a total of 10 years; the SAD – the party of the Sikhs – managed only slightly better at thrice for 12 years (before the current tenure started). The loss of the Congress in the recent polls in the state was considered an unexpected shock; and was attributed to factors not related to the 1984 events.
In contrast, the BJP made no amends. The party retained it's hardline Hindutva imagery. Neither the party nor the CM of Gujarat has ever apologized to the Muslim community. The BJP abused its power over the Gujarat police while probing the Godhra riots (after having severely abused it during the riots); as well as over the state judiciary which had become completely saffronized. Things became so bad that investigative functions had to be handed over to an SIT; and Godhra hearings moved outside the state. The state continued its perseculation of Muslims. One after another fake encounters took place in the state. The state government refused to pony up monies for the restoration of mosques destroyed during the riots. When the BJP's Minister of Home during the riots Haren Pandya was murdered, the state made attempts (and succeeded initially) to put the blame on innocent muslims from Hyderabad. All this indicates that the BJP is not contrite. If anything, it wears Godhra on its sleeve – preserving its image of being as much anti-Muslim as it is pro-Hindu. That stance has polarized the country completely. It has helped it win power repeatedly in Gujarat (and MP). But it has caused it to lose power everywhere else in the country.
In the Center, the BJP was booted out in 2004 immediatley after Godhra. In UP – where it all started with the demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992 – the party has never wielded power since the Babri days; Godhra couldn't help it revive the Babri frenzy. In Maharashtra, where the equally saffron Shiv Sena is its ally, the alliance has ruled only once for 5 years since 1995; and never after Godhra. In Bihar, its ally is extremely wary of saffron politics.
The BJP of course says it is has been fair to the Muslims. It uses the fact that it made APJ Abdul Kalam the President to prove this. That was a good thing to do; but it looks like an exception that has never been repeated. Can we ever imagine the BJP making a Muslim its party President, forget the PM of the country? Never. In fact, the BJP projects Modi as its future PM candidate. And Modi hasn't even given a single seat in the state elections to Muslim candidates. He hasn't done it ever and he is not going to do it in the future. At the national level, how many Muslim faces does one see in the BJP? Except for a few "show pieces", none. Forget the Muslims. How many Christian faces are there in the party? None. The BJP is proud of its staunch Hindu character. Even in that domain, it remains exclusivisit and strongly Brahminical. The BJP's inherent nature is to polarize. It polarized the country on the Hindu-Muslim axis. It polarized the Hindus on the Brahmin-others axis.
In the end, the Congress apologized to the Sikhs, gave power to them, made a Sikh the PM, and has included Sikhs in the party's power structure. The BJP has never apologized to the Muslims and Christians (remember how Dara Singh – a Bajrang Dal member – murdered Christian missionary Graham Staines in Orissa in 1999?); never given them power; obviously never made a Muslim or Christian the PM or even party President; and rather than including them in its party, has intentionally alienated them further. This is the difference that must be remembered. There may be similarities in the mistake committed initially; but the corrective actions taken thereafter are totally divergent.
The real truth is that the Congress remains culturally, religiously and socially heterogeneous; the BJP a Brahminical monolith. The Congress's heterogeneity forced it to apologize to the Sikhs; the BJP's homogeneity compels it not to do so to the Muslims. The two parties are incomparable; the two incidents likewise.
Anda sedang membaca artikel tentang
The big difference between the Godhra and anti-Sikh riots….
Dengan url
http://osteoporosista.blogspot.com/2012/12/the-big-difference-between-godhra-and.html
Anda boleh menyebar luaskannya atau mengcopy paste-nya
The big difference between the Godhra and anti-Sikh riots….
namun jangan lupa untuk meletakkan link
The big difference between the Godhra and anti-Sikh riots….
sebagai sumbernya
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar