Electoral Democracy or Hindutwa: Choice before BJP

Posted by: Shri. Maloy Krishna Dhar

The air was thick with speculation about the election process and expected and
wished results. Lalu’s RJD, Paswans Lok Janshakti Party, Mulayam’s Samajwadi
Party, Mayawati’s BSP, Jayalalitha’s AIADMK etc had prepared a wish list and
expected mangoes to grow on coconut tree. They neither reaped the mango nor the
coconut. The pragmatic regional party-Biju Janata Dal acted pragmatically as its ally,
the BJP had become a white alabaster around Navin Patnaik’s neck with its rabid and
aggressive policies on the ongoing struggle between Dalit Hindus and tribal
Christians. Navin was rewarded with the removal of the noose from around his neck.

Mamata Banerjee, the firebrand, unpredictable and whimsical and arrogant Bengali
political persona had a good catch taking advantage of blinded policies of the Left
and their detachment from ground realities. The Congress also ran in Bengal clinging
to the apron string of Mamata. Narrow regional vision, caste dependence and political
arrogance did not pay dividend to Chandrababu Naidu and the Tamil Amma.
The Left, which always looks at the people and the world with left eye were unable to
synchronize their vision and realize that globalization of economy is the order of the
day; linking of Indian economy with global economy could not be stopped with rotten
Marxist axioms and India required a broader nuclear understanding with the global
community as part of its self reliance in power generation. They, like the Rip Van
Winkle of the demised communist philosophy, suddenly woke up and started
fantasizing the image of a Third Front with ramshackle wheels of Lalu, Paswan,
Mulayam, Maya and Amma. Even a dream-cart cannot move on rotten wheels. Karat
& co are yet to learn that Communism is dead and Indian communists are only a label
on the old bottle of putrid Marxist wine. People of India are not ready to try them
anymore.

The main warriors Congress and the Bharatiya Janata Party approached the polls
more or less with the same agenda and usual slogans of recriminations, blame-
game, personal attacks, sacs full of secular overtures and bags full of communal
overtones. Congress had a few advantages over the BJP. Its projection of mild
mannered, soft speaking and immaculately honest Manmohan Singh as the prime
ministerial candidate rejecting courtier’s cacophony of Rahul as the new PM played a
chord of trust in Public mind. Some rural oriented policies of the last government, like
agricultural loan remission, NREG, Rojgar Yojana, housing schemes etc projected a
pro-poor image. At the same time Manmohan’s limited success in the economic front
by holding together the Indian economy in the face of global collapse, lower inflation
rate and swing back in the share market also injected positive vibes in urban
economy. Only the chronic heavy and addicted investors lost to some extent during
temporary recession in the Sensex.

The Congress government had failed to arrest deteriorating law and order situation
and increasing thrusts from Pakistan and Bangladesh based jihadi tanzeems. But the
bold action of removing the hair-care Home Minister and induction of the old horse P.
Chidambaram infused some confidence in the police and intelligence agencies,
though he did precious little in the short time he got in the last short stint.
However, Manmohan government succeeded fabulously in globalizing the dastardly
sea-borne attack on Mumbai by ISI pet Lashkar-e-Taiba. Never before had the U. S.
Israeli and British intelligence helped India in unison. Global intelligence input
coupled with Indian inputs had succeeded in framing an iron cast charge against
Pakistan based LeT. After initial dithering, denials and coy demure postures Pakistan
was forced to act. Well! Pakistan had very little choice. The Let, Jais-e-Mohammad,
Lashkar-e-Jhanghvi and the Taliban groups had started hurting Pakistan enormously.
The suicidal policy of Zardari-Gilani government was reversed under US pressure.
Pakistan itself is now the main theatre of jihadi activities. Despite failure of Indian
agencies to prevent the sea-borne attack, in spite of advance intelligence the global
backing of India’s cause had won the day for Manmohan government. The mild
master played tough. In contrast, though failure of the Congress in security front was
its main plank, the BJP led government in 1999 botched up the IC 814 hijacking
incident. By its abject surrender to the demands of the jihadis the BJP government
did earn sympathy of few families who had staged daily dharna before 7 RCR. It did
not please the country and the global community. In fact, it was a no win situation for
which no one can be blamed. But Congress used it against BJP by hitting below the
belt. Handling of the situation by RAW, IB and the concerned police forces (especially
at Amritsar) exposed the chinks in Indian armour. This one failure compounded all
other failures. The one pyrrhic success in Mumbai gave enormous dividend to
Manmohan government. His action of removing the chief Minister of Maharastra also
clicked in public imagination. All Political parties may agree on a formula: that none of
them would use a national tragedy as election plank. If we cannot agree on
everything, we can agree on one thing that the enemy can hit anytime, anywhere and
at any target. Sonia’s action of targeting the IC 814 incident was very demeaning in
nature.

The BJP led government, in general perception, had allowed the Kargil attack
happen, as the PM, Defence and Home Ministers well unmindful of such possibility in
the midst of peace talks. The colossal failures of the RAW, IB and Military Intelligence
were virtually covered up and instead of rolling of heads two strange things
happened: the enquiry report was dumped, the RAW and IB chiefs were rewarded
with gubernatorial posts. This had not endeared the BJP in public eye; though the
army and Air Force came out with flying colours. These instances are being cited
about inexperience of the BJP in governing the country and their inability to extract
the maximum from the bureaucrats. The Baboos are attuned to Congress whipping-
rewarding; a legacy of the British past. The BJP is yet to master the tricks how to
harness and drive the big Baboos.

To the credit of Congress it must be said that its youth face Rahul Gandhi, the ever-
smiling face of Priyanka and the resolute lines of determination in the eyes and face
of Sonia emitted positive vibes. The Youngistan Indian voters were drawn more to the
Congress and in the final tally it was seen that Congress returned more youth MPs
and the positive actions generated feelings of hope in public minds. They approached
the election with positive approaches and aggressive agenda despite desertion by
the Left Front, RJD, LJP, and in the face of humiliating bargaining by Mulayam Singh.
The funniest part was Lalu Yadav offering 3 seats to Congress in Bihar.

The BJP has very little young face in the party; terming Arun Jaitly and Sushama
Swaraj as young Turks would be an insult to Indian youth. BJP has a vast pool of
youth power in the RSS and its limited cadres. But such youth cadres are not
projected in planned manner; they are simply asked to worship, do pranam, charan
sparsh etc of the senior leaders and follow them like herd of cattle. There is no
system of training the youth leaders and gradually push them to the forefront. The
geriatric leaders cannot match the youthful vibes of young leaders like Rahul,
Priyanka, Jyotiraditya, Sachin etc. Moreover, Rahul had visited several universities
and institutions to inspire the youths. The BJP and RSS leaders just issued sermons
and did not make effort to exploit potential youths in the ABVP, RSS and other front
organisations. The BJP does not have a resource pool in its youth wing who are
allowed to graduate to higher positions.

The party, on the other hand, went to the poles with an artificial hype and concluded
inference that the country was ready to reject the Congress for alleged failures of
Manmohan government, minority and Dalit alienation from Congress, Left and caste
satraps deserting the main adversary and with presumptions that in Andhra Pradesh
TDP and Praja Rajyam Party would perform wonders. It’s over optimism of the
charisma of Jayalalitha was not based on impact of the Sri Lankan war against the
LTTE and AIADMK failure to empathize with the beleaguered Tamil civilians in Jaffna
and Mullaitivu areas. DMK blew hot and cold and the aging supremo went on a token
fast. Manmohan government’s open denunciation of Sri Lankan offensive and
apparent neutrality on the issue had given ample opportunity to President
Rajapaksha to go for the final push with liberal weapons and personnel supply from
China and Pakistan. India silently connived with the killing of over 20,000 Tamil
civilians by ground firing and bombing by Pakistani pilots flying Sri Lankan fighters.
The BJP failed to gauge this diplomatic support of Delhi to Rajapaksha and at the
same time carrying on diplomatic demarches for protecting Tamil interest. It is rather
surprising that a couple of former intelligence chiefs now in BJP camp could not
decipher this nexus between New Delhi, Chennai and Colombo.

The hollow hype was accidentally discovered when a former governor in a

northeastern state dropped in a gathering of former bureaucrats and claimed that his
party (BJP) would score minimum 180 seats. When confronted with state-wise tally
the former and now governor-in- waiting fumbled and his figure of 180 collapsed like
pack of cards. Another BJP stalwart rather scowled at me when it was pointed that
that: Muslims were inclined to go with the best protector in different states and there
would be no Muslim block-voting; the Dalits were disenchanted with Mayawati for her
new love for the upper castes; two major states-Bihar and Orissa were under spells of
Nitish Kumar and Navin Patnaik; Voters in MP, Gujarat and Uttaranchal were
disenchanted with the ruling BJP and in Rajasthan they were angry with the former
Royal Government of Vasundhara Raje. Though politically unattached, I was termed
as a Congress agent by the friend. He was not ready to accept that the BJP had
blundered in Orissa by pursuing blind pro-Hindutwa programme in Kandhmal,
Narnendra Modi had lost considerable ground after his minister was indicted for
communal riot, and that the government of MP had lost ground because of severe
caste alienation, alienation of Muslim voters and maverick performance and
scandalous antics of some of the ministers.

BJP’s lack of moderation, increase in shrill communal cries a la Varun Gandhi

episode and arrogant defiance by Narendra Modi, Advani’s frontal personal attack on
Manmohan Singh, Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi had not endeared the party to the
electorates. As Arun Jaitly correctly said-moderation won over arrogance. Such
personal attacks were not only symbols of political bankruptcy but this also betrayed
that the eternal “Rath yatri” had nothing better to offer to the country.
Projection of the 82 year old veteran as “Lauh Purush” did not match with his
performance as the Union Home Minister. Compared to him the low-profile, soft
speaking and constructive approach of Manmohan Singh gave an impression that
this one person was capable of carrying the country with him despite stabbing by
some of his coalition partners. In fact, the country does not require a “Lauh Purush”; it
requires a humble and silent determined worker who can push the country towards
economic development and social integration and inclusion of as much sections of
the people as possible. Advani’s image that he was in favour of exclusion of the
minorities from his vision did more harm than consolidating Hindu votes. India has
walked past the politics of exclusion. The Sangh Parivar refuses to understand this
truth.

The other frivolous issue that Advani brought up was the claim that if voted to power
his government would retrieve lacs of crores Indian money stacked in Swiss banks. It
created some media hype. But it had no impact on the electorate. Congress craftily
threw back the missile by asserting that BJP did precious little to retrieve the money
when it was in power. Such frivolous issues betrayed BJP’s failure to project the core
issues concerning the common people. No poor in India imagine that he would get a
part of the fabulous money even if that was retrieved from Swiss banks. Like the
Bofors gun it also has become a dead issue.
Indian Voters wanted a stable government; that underpinning could be discerned by
any keen ground observer. People were tired with haughty, maverick, greedy and
parochial coalition partners of Vajpayee and Manmohan regimes. Track records of
Jayalalitha, Mamata, Chandrababu and Left groups as coalition partners have not
been very laudatoriest. These seasonal birds flew away at the slightest pretexts and
stalled several vital programming and decision making of the government. This time
around the voters wanted stability and a compact government. As a coalition savvy
party the BJP is less reputed than the Congress. Despite Left’s intransigence
Manmohan had pulled up the nuke deal and surfed rather comfortably over the
sudden crest of economic collapse initiated by down-slide domino action of US
economy, followed by European and Japanese economic collapse. That involved
some smooth jugglery and innovation. It is doubtful if BJP has that kind of resilience
in surviving whimsical behavior of coalition partners and its capability of pulling off a
major international deal in the face of domestic and international obstructions.
Manmohan has proved conclusively that he is a better swimmer in adversity and his
political boss Sonia Gandhi is a better oarsperson. The country trusted that team plus
the projection of pro-youth image by Rahul and Priyanka. The BJP lacked these
assets and skills to compete the oarsperson-ship of Sonia and swimming capability of
Manmohan. The country, by and large trusted Mnamohan-Sonia duo and not the
singular image of Advani. In the absence of Vajpayee the BJP failed to project a
moderate face. Finally, Manmohan’s moderation scored better.

Congress took advantage of non-governance and bad governance in certain states

led by idiosyncratic leaders. It did well in West Bengal, UP, Punjab, MP, Gujarat,
Uttaranchal, Kerala and Rajasthan etc states simply because the people had started
losing faith on Mayawati, CPM & partners, Akalis and disastrous performance by
certain BJP led governments. Congress scored well in Andhra Pradesh and Haryana
despite the incumbency factors; both YSR and Huda were rated as acceptable
administrators despite complaints of heavy corruption against YSR.

In contrast the BJP failed to exploit this particular aspect; it rather failed to protect its
own homes from poaching by the Congress. In seemingly impregnable Narendra
Modi’s Gujarat Congress made substantive gains. It is fruitless to argue that Muslim
voted in favour of Congress. They did because they have no confidence on Modi.
Even Hindu votes were divided. The BJP, VHP and other ancillaries of the Parivar
worked at cross purposes. With all his charisma and magic Modi had not succeeded
to constructing a solid cadre base.

In fact, BJP has no confirmed and structured cadre base. Congress has some
organizational structure even in remote villages. The party has considerable hold on
Gram Sabhas, Panchayats, and Zila Parishads and through the Youth Congress and
the NSUI among the youth forces. Devolution of power to the Panchayats has
generated friendly vibes for the Congress. BJP’s grassroots organisation is
amorphous. It depends on the cadres of the RSS, VHP, Bajrang Dal, ABVP etc outfits
and peripheral workers who generally nurse Hindutwa as a political ideal. Political
cadres are different from ideological cadres.

There are differences between Communist cadres and cadres of other political
parties. Cadres are committed workers at the grassroots level who remain loyal to the
party come summer come winter. Congress has minimum 25% of committed cadres,
Communists 60% and the BJP around 10%. In an election mobilization the BJP has
to fall back on Sangh Parivar cadres. Modi and other BJP leaders had failed to
mobilize 100% support from the Parivar cadres; at several places the Parivar cadres
even worked for Congress. In several places in Delhi, my personal knowledge
indicate that the BJP booth managers had sold their boots and booth clusters to
Congress candidates by accepting huge money. This was true in Delhi and even in
Gujarat. Such deviation of Parivar cadre support is not new; it happened in 1980
when Indira Gandhi was supported by bulk of the Parivar cadres. The BJP and the
Sangh Parivar have to sit on more Atmachintan and Atmamanthan to determine why
this fiasco took place in 2009! Why the cadres betrayed them!

There are allegations that Modi suffered because of his strident and unrepentant
communal attitude. On charges of genocide Modi and Rajiv Gandhi stand on the
same pedestal; the former is accused of Gujarat riots and the later for 1984 anti-Sikh
riots. Both Modi and Rajiv had erred on same counts; they did not order killing of the
minorities, but both of them, being at the helms of administration, failed to respond
speedily to prevent holocaust. The Sikhs have not pardoned Rajiv even after 25
years. How can Modi get out of the scar within such a short period? If he wanted to,
he should have gone for demonstrative penance in respect of the riot sufferers, both
Muslims and Hindus. This lack of lessons from history of Rajiv has harmed the BJP
immensely.

Another problem that haunted the BJP was continuous infighting in the higher
formations of the central party. Rajnath-Arun Jaitly tiff over manager-politician Mittal
has been well publicized. It did not have a manager like Pramod Mahajan. Similar
silent clashes between Advani-Joshi camps, Venkaiah Naidu-Modi camps were
rattling the party from within. Lack of inner party coherence led to group fighting and
distribution of tickets to non-deserving candidates and lackluster and disjointed
campaigning. The BJP may like to look into the inner conflicts and try to realize if
Rajnath is the right leader, if Joshi’s hunger for power has been saturated and if it is
time for the party to throw up younger leadership from its own and some from the
politically oriented RSS and ABVP cadres? Introspection should not end in shuffling
the dusts under the carpets. They should learn from Congress that to attract millions
of new Youngistan voters they require youth leaders in the front and not sandal
paste-kumkum smeared old haggard foreheads. Youth is the key to future elections
and the youth are not inspired by communal slogans. They want good governance.

Defeat often disorients political masses and their supporters. Some BJP and Sangh
activists flooded the cell phone waves by SMS saying that BJP’s defeat could be
attributed to rigging of the EVM by Congress CEC nexus. I had suggested one such
propagandist that they should take a high level delegation to the President or file a
petition in the Supreme Court. It silenced some of them. Propaganda has a problem.
Like Hitler was eaten up by Goebbelian propaganda the BJP may also become a
victim of such self-deception. It is correct that in many European countries and in
USA EVM has come under suspicion. They have discarded the system. In Venezuela
it was found that in the EVM supply company the government has 28% stakes. If
there is doubt about EVMs an all party meeting can look into the matter and go into
the depth if the Congress and CEC have any nexus with the EVM suppliers.
However, in India ballot voting is more hazardous than EVM voting. In BV system
booths are physically captured by some honourable and prospective honourable
MPs.

The BJP has another inbuilt disadvantage. A green politician Varun Gandhi raised
high strung communal slogans and emerged as a leader from a nobody. Agitational
politics of the BJP had created many frontline politicians like Uma Bharti. Even a
short span of history has proved that such politicians do not last. The BJP went all the
way to support Varun. This might have helped Varun and the BJP in a few seats in
UP. But it alienated Muslim voters from the party. On the other hand by replacing
Tytlar and Sajjan Kumar, when Sikhs objected, Sonia Gandhi earned accolade of the
Sikhs and sent a vibrant message to the minorities in general that Congress was
ready to atone past mistakes.

Hopefully the BJP and the Parivar would learn from this and stop giving slogans of
Ram Mandir, Hindutwa and narrow communal approaches, if the party wants to
emerge as either a Left of the Centre or Right of the Centre mainstream all-India
political entity acceptable to all communities. If it wants to remain a Hindu political
entity it will suffer worse consequences. BJP cannot afford to break any more
mosques, construct temples at disputed places and realize the impractical dream of
Hindu Raj. Any impartial survey would indicate that common Hindus support status
quo and are not seriously communal though some of them are concerned with
alleged minorityism of the Congress & allies and are vaguely apprehensive of Muslim
resurgence.

The BJP has another practical disadvantage. Considered as a Hindi heartland party,
it has just started rooting in the South and in eastern States like Assam. Its back door
entry in Bengal proves that Bengali Hindus, though considerably alerted by Muslim
preponderance and demographic threat have to not been successfully converted to
communal politics. If it has to find a foothold in the State of its founder leader, Dr. S.
P. Mukherjee the BJP has to emerge as grassroots level mainstream party which can
identify with middle class Bengali concerns and emerge as the voice of the Hindus in
the districts bordering Bangladesh. The last Election has shown that Mamata and
Congress exploited Muslim votes better than the CPM. The BJP has almost nil
support in the rural areas. Sections of middle class urban voters alone cannot be a
stepping stone to victory.
Congress has an advantage over the BJP. Being a remnant of the original Congress
movement it has grassroots support almost in every part of India. Only bad
governance by the Congress, as during the Emergency and scandal-ridden regime of
Rajiv, had witnessed complete washout of the Congress. Bold and fair leadership can
revitalise the dormant Congress supports in any part of the country. In 2009 election
the moot question was: had Congress succeeded in projecting Sonia, Rahul and
Priyanka as capable leaders who can give good governance? It is not easy to give
any verdict just now. But, in case Manmohan government can continue to govern well
and improve security environ and revitalise the economy than such a conclusion
would not be out of place. BJP’s short stint in government does not support its claim
of India shining.

The BJP, on the other hand, barring in Chattisgarh, Karnataka, and Himachal and to
some extent in Madhya Pradesh has not been able to throw up a consolidated image
of leadership that could be trusted with good governance. Its partial UP success is
neither for Advani nor for Rajnath Singh. Upper, backward and lower caste Hindus
lost confidence in BSP and SP. The fall out was almost evenly picked up by the
Congress and the BJP. Muslims in UP, obviously voted mostly for the Congress. In
fact, in the midst of election campaign some BJP insiders threw up the name of
Narendra Modi as the Prime Ministerial candidate. Modi may have some credibility in
Gujarat, Maharashtra and among committed Hindutwa voters but no one in the
country is ready to accept as the PM, not yet, till he proves that besides being a
Hindu he can uphold constitutional rights of all sections of the people. Rajiv Gandhi
had failed on this score; so also Narendra Modi.

The BJP has not drawn lessons from history. Even at the peak of communal tension
and killings on the eve of partition the Hindu Mahasabha had not succeeded in
drawing votes from the majority Hindus. It was a pressure group in the Congress and
remained a pressure group. If the party, whose successor is the BJP, could not cash
on Hindu votes at the peak of communal divide how can it now dream of securing
100% Hindu votes? Such a situation can only arise if there is total cultural and
religious polarization in the country. India is a multireligious, multicultural, multilingual
and multiethnic country. Its kaleidoscopic varieties are enshrined in the Constitution.
The BJP, if it wants to emerge as a giant opposition to Congress and riffraff regional
and caste-based parties it should project an image of acceptability to all sections of
the people. Such an image turnover is perhaps not possible as long as the political
face of the party remain rooted in the Sangh Parivar. The Parivar, as a social
movement, may continue to serve its targeted population for betterment of the
community, serving the fringe population and fighting against caste divergences and
unify the Hindu polity. The RSS can no more irresponsibly use the BJP as a political
front. A composite country cannot be governed by party branded as communal. That
BJP is communal is believed by many Hindus even. The BJP has to shed that stigma
and while keeping Hindu welfare in mind, it has to adopt a policy for Sarvajana Hitaya
Cha. Common welfare of all the common people is the soul of electoral democracy.

Some of my Hindutawadi friends mailed me long articles suggesting that the BJP was
defeated because they were not sufficiently Hindu and deficiently secular. They
advocated that stiffer Hindutwa slogans and activities would attract wholesale Hindu
votes. The BJP should shed the secular image. It is difficult to make a blind see,
dumb speak and deaf to hear to fine music (no dig at my especially able friends, it is
a simile). My Hindutwa friends forget that India is a predominantly Hindu country that
has come to accept secularism as a constitutional scheme of governance and
essential ingredient of nationhood. Mere 13% Muslims cannot pose danger to 80%
Hindus. The allegation of growing Muslim population and subversion of the Indian
Muslims, though partially correct, is not a threat to the fabrics of the nation. Out of,
say, 160 million Muslims at best 1 million may have turned resurgent. By itself the
assumed figure is dangerous. Even in Taliban affected Pakistan the fighting strength
of the Taliban is about 30, 000. It is correct that some Muslims have come to notice
for violent pro-jihad activities. However, any deviant activities by any section of the
Muslims can be tackled by the State under existing laws. Even if a small segment of
the Muslims have been subverted that need not essentially lead to a conclusion that
India requires a communal Hindu party to establish pure Hindutwa entity. It might
create a situation in the country that existed in 1935 and rolled down to 1947 with
indescribable pains. Do we want to go back in history and recreate the scenario that
haunted us in the past?

Obviously not. Every religion and culture in India is distinct and these have added to
the varieties of the country. One cannot thrive to the exclusion of the other. Such
exclusivism had invited disaster in the past. Do we require recreation of the scenario?
The BJP has to ask itself these questions and analyse that in a dynamic country
geriatric leadership has inherent values as well as drawbacks. There has to be a
healthy balance of generation gaps. The BJP requires grassroots cadres of its own
not depending on the Sangh Parivar, should be able to evoke confidence in all
sections of the people, desist from supporting mad religious frenzy and hatred and
project an image that it can give good governance. One Vajpayee does not make a
party. There should be thousands of Vajpayees to evoke confidence in public mind.
Please stop Yatras, and get down to ground realities, if the BJP wants to emerge as
the mainstream party acceptable to all sections of the people. Construction of
Temples is the easiest job. Construction of a steady and believable political edifice
that can govern is rather very difficult. In case BJP realize this than only India can
have a healthy Two Party system with Lalu like riffraff elements thrown in the fringe.

Religious proclivities should be confined to societal, cultural and moral realms and
banished from political framework by all the communities. Congress and riffraff
parties should also rethink if their open pro-
pro-Muslim policies are not adding to the fear
psychosis of the Hindus and are pushing them to resort to Newton’s Third Law of
Motion-
Motion-Hindu reaction to Muslim appeasement. Hopefully, Sonia Gandhi and the new
Manmohan government would take this aspect seriously and give a positive message
that the historical mistake committed by Congress in Lucknow session to agree to
communal formulae for the country does not propel it to repeat the same while
implementing highly controversial Sachar Committee Report, which is worse than the
Lucknow formulae devised by Motilal Nehru. Sachar need not divide the country once
more to alienate the majority for pleasing amorphous grievances of a minority. Out of
80+% Hindu majority in India at least 55% + are actively opposed to any Lucknow
pact like arrangement under Manmohan-Sachar dispensation. Sonia and Congress,
in the first flush of victory should not push the country back in history. Hindu
susceptibility cannot be thrown away to dust bin of current history in the making; it is
pregnant with several complicated
complicated dynamics, which have the potential of disturbing
the seemingly secular fabrics of the country. In addition to one or two Abhinav Bharat
suspected incidents hundreds of such incidents might resurface. On this issue the
country is sitting on dry powder keg. Hopefully Manmohan would not be blind to these
potentialities and repeat another 1916