Organization: Penn State University
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 16:07:57 EST
From: <DXA4@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian
Subject: BJP is Unequivocally Committed to Secularism-LK Advani (Part I)


This is the article written by Shri Advani from his detention at Mata Ki Tila
exclusively for Indian Express on Ayodhya on Dec. 6th and After.

Dinesh Agrawal...

********************************

BJP IS UNEQUIVOCALLY COMMITTED TO SECULARISM
By: Shri L. K. Advani
Source: Indian Express, December 27, 1992

Last year, a Calcutta daily asked me to identify a day or moment in my life
which I regarded my happiest. I named October 30th, 1990, and more specifically
the moment I heard the BBC broadcast that kar sevaks had overcome all obstacles
and broken all barriers put up by the Mulayam Singh government, penetrated into
Ayodhya and performed karseva.

Ironically, this year's kar seva day at Ayodhya, Dec. 6, turned out to be one
of the most depressing days in my life. Of course, most other there were ecsta-
tic with joy, a mood I just could not share. I have seldom felt as dejected and
downcast as I felt that day.

My sadness, however, did not stem from any disenchantment with the Ayodhya
movement, or with the path the party had chosen for itself, or, as the trite
phrase goes, that we had been riding a tiger which could not dismount.

In fact, the post demolition developments have fully vindicated our misgivings
about the opponents of this movement, and have reinforced our resolve to pursue
the path more vigorously.

There were three very specific reasons for my distress.
Firstly, I felt sad the Dec. 6 happenings had impaired the reputation of the
BJP and the RSS as organizations capable of enforcing discipline. True, a very
large percentage of the over two lakhs assembled at Ayodhya were not members
either of BJP or of the RSS. But that did not absolve us of our responsibility.
Secondly, I felt sad that a meticulously drawn up plan of action whereunder the
UP Government was steadily marching forward towards discharging its mandate
regarding temple construction, without violating any law or disregarding any
court order, had gone awry.

The BJP's action-plan contemplated delinking the dispute about the structure
from commencing construction at the shilanyas site (within the 2.77-acre
acquired land), negotiating about the structure while the construction work
proceeded apace, and, if negotiations failed, resorting to legislation.

If State legislation was blocked by the Centre, we intended to seek a national
mandate. We were thus working towards achieving our objective peacefully, and
by the due process of law. Not only the BJP, but the RSS, the VHP and the sants
were all agrred on this approach.

If the exercise contemplated has now been short-circuited in a totally unfore-
seen manner, the above organizations can certainly be blamed for not being able
to judge the impatience of the people participating in the movement.

No one can deny the manner in which courts had been dragging their feet on all
issues relating to Ayodhya, and the obstructive and obtuse role of the Centre
had tried the patience of the people to the utmost limit.

The third and the most important reason of my unhappiness that day was that, in
my perception, the day's incidents would affect the BJP's overall image (not
electoral prospects) adversely, and, to that extent, our cause would suffer a
temporary setback.

When I speak of a setback, I am not at all thinking in political terms. In fact
politically, these events have boosted the BJP's poll prospects no end. The
Congress, the JD, the Communists - all are frantically exerting themselves to
ensure no elections are held for at least a year.

After the three State Assemblies controlled by the BJP were dissolved, Congress
spokesman V.N. Gadgil said elections would be held within six months.

It did not take Arjun Singh even 24 hours to come forth with a contradiction,
saying polls in these three states would be held after one year!

In a recent article (The Hindustan Times, December 17, 1992), former Statesman
editor S. Sahay has noted: "The feedback is that were elections to be held to-
day in UP, Congress candidates would find it difficult to retain their deposits
." Reports pouring in from other parts of the country are no different.

Despite what our adversaries have been saying about us day in day out, we have
never regarded Ayodhya as a ladder to power. Through this movement, the BJP
has only intensified its ongoing crusade against the politics of vote-banks,
and the politics of minorityism, which we believe is gravely undermining the
fabric of national unity.

The Ayodhya movement, according to the BJP, is not just for building a temple.
It is a mass movement - the biggest ever since independence - to reaffirm
the nation's cultural identity.

This reaffirmation alone, we hold, can provide an enduring basis for national
unity, and besides, the dynamo for a resurgent resolute and modern India.

It is slanderous to say the Ayodhya movement is an assault on secularism. It is
wrong to describe even the demolition of the Babri Structure as negation of
secularism. The demolition is more related to lack of a firm commitment in the
general masses to the rule of law, and an exasperation with the frustrating
sluggishness of the judicial process.

I remember very well the Bhagalpur episode of some years back. The whole
country felt outraged that undertrial prisoners - they may have been notorious
dacoits - should be so cruelly blinded by policemen. But when I visited
Bhagalpur, I was surprised to find that among the people there was little
disapproval of what the police had done. Many lawyers of Bhagalpur actually
came out in defence of the police action!

The BJP is unequivocally committed to secularism. As conceived by our consti-
tution makers, secularism meant panth-sama-bhava, that is, equal respect for
all religions.

Secularism as embedded into the Indian Constitution has three important
ingredients, namely (i) rejection of theocracy; (ii) equality of all citizens,
irrespective of their faith; and (iii) full freedom of faith and worship.

We also believe India is secular because it is predominantly Hindu. Theo-
cracy is alien to our history and tradition.

Indian nationalism is rooted, as was India's freedom struggle against
colonialism, in a Hindu ethos. It was Gandhiji who projected Ramarajya as the
goal of the freedom movement. He was criticised by the Muslim League as being
an exponent of Hindu raj. The League did not relish the chanting of Ram Dhun
when at Gandhiji's meetings or his insistence on goraksha (cow-protection).

The League, at one of its annual sessions, passed a formal resolution
denouncing Vande Mataram as 'idolatrous'. All this never made leaders of the
freedom struggle apologetic about the fountainhead of their inspiration.

Unfortunately, for four decades now, in the name of secularism, politicians
have been wanting the nation to disown its essential personality. For the
Left-inclined, secularism has become a euphemism to cloak their intense allergy
to religion, and more particularly, to Hinduism.

It is this attitude which the BJP characterises as pseudo-secularism. This
attitude is wrong and unscientific. Coupled with the weakness of political
parties for vote-banks, it becomes perverse and baneful.

In October, 1990, the day V.P. Singh stopped the rath yatra, and put me and
my colleagues in the yatra behind bars, A. B. Vajpayee called on the President,
and informed him the BJP had withdrawn support to the National Front govt.

It was obvious to all that Mr. Singh's government had been reduced to a
hopeless minority. But he did not resign. Instead, he convened a special
session of Parliament to vote on a confidence motion tabled by him. He said
he was doing so mainly to precipitate a debate on secularism and communalism.
We welcomed the debate, and challenged him not to confine it to the four walls
of Parliament, but to take it to the people.

V. P. Singh was defeated in Parliament that day. But he shied away from accept-
ing our challenge. Events nevertheless move inexorably towards the trial of
strength we had asked for.

Seven months later, people went to the polls to elect the country's 10th Lok
Sabha. Unlike as in 1989, when we were part of an opposition combine, the BJP
fought the election all on its own and emerged the principal opposition party
in the Lok Sabha.

What has gratified us all along is not merely that our numerical strength in
Parliament and State legislatures has been growing at a rapid pace, but that
acceptance of our ideology in all sections of society and at all levels has
been growing simultaneously.

A silent minority has been building up even among the Muslims which appreciates
the BJP is not anti-Muslim as its enemies have been trying to depict it, and,
more importantly, the BJP leadership means what it says, and says what it means
and is not hypocritical like other political parties.

The BJP governments' track record in the matter of preserving communal peace
in their respective States has added considerably to the BJP's credibility in
this regard.

It is the process of widening acceptability of the BJP ideology within the
country, and also among the people of Indian origin overseas, which has upset
our opponents the most. It is this process precisely which may be somewhat
decelerated by the Dec. 6 events. I have little doubt, however, that the party
can, with proper planning and effort, soon get over this phase.

(To be continued)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian