BJP's New Hue

IIPM Mumbai Campus

With an eye on resurrecting its political fortunes at the Centre, the saffron brigade has donned a liberal cloak and begun to train its focus on Muslims and Dalits

In an incident that can only be termed intriguing, Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi, on November 15 this year, visited Ahmedabad's Muslim-dominated Juhapura locality, which is often referred to as “mini Pakistan” by the locals. The occasion was a Sufi music and qawwali programme at Sarkhez ka Roza, a Mughal era tomb, organised by the Gujarat government under a special drive to preserve and maintain heritage buildings. More interestingly, the tomb was especially chosen for the programme at Modi's behest. It was for the first time after the 2002 Gujarat riots that Modi had come calling here. On this visit, he spent a considerable time with Muslims of the locality.

December 6 is a special day for the BJP. Vishwa Hindu Parishad and other Hindu organisations celebrate it as shaurya diwas throughout the country, and BJP leaders make their presence felt in large numbers in these programmes. It is the day of Ambedkar’s death anniversary as well. This time around, the BJP top brass forgot Ram Lalla and chose to put the temple issue on the backburner. It instead focussed on Ambedkar. While Lal Krishna Advani bowed his head before Ambedkar’s statue in Parliament, prominent BJP Dalit leader Satya Prakash Jatiya demanded that Ambedkar’s parinirvana site, the place where he died in New Delhi, should be accorded the same status as Mahatma Gandhi’s memorial. The party's other Dalit MPs in their letters to the Prime Minister echoed Jatiya's demand.

On December 12, organisations associated with VHP organised a yagna and a meeting of sadhus for the construction of Ram temple in Delhi. It was incumbent upon the local BJP leaders to make the programme a success. BJP's national organising secretary Ramlal convened several meetings of the cadre. However, on the day of the programme no BJP leader of repute was seen on the dais. Even the handful who turned up preferred to sit off the stage. Usually, such programmes see a huge gathering of big and small BJP leaders.

These incidents are pointers to the fact that Nitin Gadkari’s BJP is changing. It has been a year since Gadkari took over the reins as party president and the outcome of his policies is clearly visible. With an eye on the future political gains, the party is keen to shed its staunch Hindutva image and look more liberal. Gadkari aims to increase the party’s vote bank by 10 per cent by 2014 to wrest power away from the Congress.
The change in the party’s policies and programmes is a result of this thinking. Gadkari is eyeing the Muslim and Dalit vote bank which has traditionally been with the Congress and of late with other secular parties. Hence, instead of the temple, the party wants to make development and good governance its key issues. Gadkari has also coined two new slogans that embody the party’s new focus, “politics for development” and “antodaya” (meaning the development of the marginalised). For the latter he has established a special Antodaya cell in the party. For the politics of development, he has instructed all BJP workers to play a facilitatory role to government departments running development schemes.

Actually, it is now more of a compulsion for the BJP to come out of its hardline image, discard old issues and talk of development. At a time when Congress leaders, including Sonia and Rahul Gandhi, are making development the focus of all party policies, it is but natural for the BJP to follow suit. As political analyst Dr Subhrokamal Dutta puts it, “In a democracy, the politics of the opposition is determined by the agenda of the ruling party. If the ruling party is talking of development, the opposition should ideally do the same.”

But the question is: is RSS happy with the recent development of BJP distancing itself from the temple issue? According to sources close to Gadkari, this change in politics enjoys the support of RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat. Even otherwise, Gadkari, who became the party chief at the behest of RSS, consults the organisation in every matter of importance.

As soon as he became the party chief, Gadkari initiated a process of dialogue with Muslims. In almost all his speeches he would cite the example of BJP ruled states, especially Gujarat, where development-oriented policies of the government had helped Muslims progress through an increase in their income and employment. By putting aside the temple issue and by stressing development programmes initiated for the benefit of Muslims and Dalits, the party is sending out the message that it is no longer a party unfriendly towards them. Mohd Idris Khan, a Muslim BJP leader in Ghaziabad, UP, and former district president of the party’s minority front, seconds this observation. “Although there have been many schemes for the development of the minorities right from the time of Kalyan Singh to Atal Bihari Vajpayee, but Muslims were largely apprehensive of the party's motives. By pushing aside the temple issue, the party is ensuring that more Muslims come into its fold,” says Khan. The grant of aid to madrasas in Madhya Pradesh and Gujarat is one of the steps that have been taken to woo the Muslims.
Senior BJP leader and former cabinet minister Shahnawaz Hussain says, “Through our work we are trying to remove the misconceptions that had been put into the minds of Muslims about the BJP. As a result, in the recent Bihar elections we have won a majority of Muslim-dominated seats. We have the support of almost 21 per cent Muslims there. In the panchayat and municipal council elections of Gujarat, our candidates have won on more than 100 Muslim dominated seats.”

To attract Dalits to the party, the BJP has started celebrating the birthdays and death anniversaries of several Dalit icons in a grand manner. It has also decided to raise issues pertaining to Dalits. This year, for the first time the party organised grand programmes on Valmiki Jayanti and on Ambedkar Diwas.

The BJP has understood that in today's coalition politics, Ambedkar is more relevant than Ram. In the BJP-ruled states special programmes are being formulated for the uplift of the Dalits but the focus is on educating them. The party believes that once educated, the Dalits will be more aware and parties like the BSP will not be able to exploit them.

National president of the BJP SC front Dushyant Kumar Gautam says, “Special funds are being allocated for the education of Dalits in BJP-ruled states. Our governments are giving scholarships on a large scale to Dalit children to encourage them to go abroad for higher studies.” It shows the aprty's changed perception of the “swadeshi”. The party’s earlier stance was to oppose the videshi (foreign).

Gadkari sees the party’s future in Ambedkar and Antodaya and not in Ram Lalla. Though a faction of the party is extremely unhappy with the policy alteration, Gadkari does not seem to care as long as he enjoys the Sangh's support.

For More IIPM Info, Visit below mentioned IIPM articles.
Management Guru Arindam Chaudhuri Dean Business School IIPM
IIPM Excom Prof Rajita Chaudhuri
Kapil Sibal's voters want Jan Lokpal, not Government-proposed Lokpal Bill
What is E-PAT?

Item Numbers Are The New Mantras of Bollywood
IIPM, GURGAON
Noida Extn dreams breaks as court scraps new acquisition
IIPM: Leading consistently on multiple fronts
Anna Hazare Jan Lokpak Bill Vs Government Lokpal Bill

IIPM Prof Arindam Chaudhuri on 'BJP and Kashmir Azaadi'

IIPM Prof Rajita Chaudhuri's Snaps

IF BJP PLAYS ITS CARDS WELL, KASHMIR COULD BE ITS BIG CHANCE TO STAGE A RETURN!

More than a year ago, I wrote a cover story in this very magazine stating, WHY NOT AZAADI FOR KASHMIR? I argued why keeping unwilling Kashmiris as a part of India was a huge drain on resources as well as on India's moral authority. Moreover, unlike all other parts of India that may also demand independence tomorrow, Kashmir has a huge and long history attached; and worldwide, when such groups have historically staked a claim for their independence, democratic nations have obliged. My article had then triggered a tremendous response – ranging for praise to virulent abuse! I still stand by my point that it is pointless to force Kashmiris to remain with India at gunpoint. This only triggers ill feeling. I have many Kashmiris and Muslims studying in my institute and even working with me. And many are also linked up with me on my Facebook account. When I at times go to their profiles and check out the material that they post, it scares the wits out of me. They are mostly openly anti-India. They write stories of all that they have gone through. They post videos that will make anyone hate India. They themselves almost hate India! And they want azaadi for Kashmir.

Digressing a little, if Facebook is any indicator of what real people of Kashmir want, that's freedom from India. When I read their posts, two things cross my mind. Firstly, are they potential terrorists? The answer is, of course not… I know a lot of them. They are educated, nice people. It’s a free nation and they speak their minds out of their personal experiences. The second thought that crosses my mind is obviously how Facebook has become an open forum to actually spread hatred; and that the Intelligence departments of India should keep a track of the communication happening there… My blood oft en boils when I read so much of open anti-India comments. And imagine I have to oft en see these people the next day walking into my office! It is surely a great test of patience and belief in democratic values for a patriotic Indian. I do try to understand their perspective too and realise their reasons for hating India. But I must add that while I can vouch for a lot of my students that they are nice people, I obviously can’t vouch for their friends. The situation now is such, that completely anti-India people are openly spreading hatred for India amongst Indian Muslims. Accept it or not, there are clear signs that a strong united community of India haters is developing, who are connected not as friends but by their hatred for India – something that was not that easy in pre-Facebook days. Anyway, I will leave it at that.

Coming back to my original topic – should we give azaadi to Kashmir? I still say, yes, of course! Keeping people dictatorially bound to a nation under gunpoint is totally meaningless and almost inhuman. But I do realise the problems that the Indian government has in hand. An azaad Kashmir must come with some pledges from whoever becomes the leader of Kashmir. A pledge to take back hundreds of thousands of Kashmiri Pandits and allow them full freedom to earn a living and practice their religion. A pledge to allow similar freedom to the Buddhists, Shias and other minority communities. And a pledge to remain a secular republic in both form and content. Of course, the question is, will those leaders be able to give such pledges? And will they be thereon willing to keep them? The truth possibly is that within 48 hours of such independence being granted, Kashmir will become a part of Pakistan and an Islamic state. Soon after, China would gain control of strategic parts of the region. And we must remember that India is the only major nation to have systematically lost national territory in the 20th century. From the Government of India's point of view, it surely cannot afford to lose more, nor can it afford to let azaad Kashmir become a playground for Islamic radicals and China.

So what does India do? That’s a tricky one to answer. But right now, all I can say is that from a political perspective, the Congress can’t take the situation lightly and keep waffling on it and let anarchy prevail. It’s actually sad to see our liberal and so-called secular intellectuals bend over backwards to be politically correct even when faced with dangers of hardline Islam. If someone from the Hindu or Christian community is a bigot, we never hesitate to denounce such an individual openly. Why do we then hesitate to denounce in the same tone, when it comes to a Muslim bigot? Why can’t we tell radical Muslims – just as we tell radical Hindus – that their ideology and vision is simply not acceptable to India? That oppressive and regressive parts of the sharia are as unacceptable as parts of the manu code of the Hindus? It's time the government took a strong stance – whatever it is – and engaged the masses to make their viewpoint logically clear to Indians at large who are finding the government weak at this point of time.

I am reminded of the days of the Shah Bano case when the Congress, having absolute majority in Parliament, was the unquestionable dominant political force and BJP was in the fringes. Post the Shah Bano case [when Congress passed the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, overruling a Supreme Court verdict], we saw the dramatic growth of BJP from 2 seats to 85 seats to even majority as the nation in general clearly saw the government's attempt to overrule the verdict of the Supreme Court of India as an illogical appeasement of the Muslims. The current happenings can possibly give Indians a similar feel. And if the Congress doesn’t look decisive, this could be the opportunity that BJP might have been waiting for. BJP's Ram Janmabhoomi plank might be dead, but its 'non appeasement of Muslims' plank is very much alive. Masses are also getting enlightened today. They are on the same Facebook. They see the pseudo-intellectuals speak. And they know this can take a dangerous turn. They may not take much time to turn the wave during the 2014 elections, giving the Congress a nasty shock and leading to a dramatic revival of the BJP.

TIMELINE J&K

1846: Jammu and Kashmir state is created under the Treaty of Amritsar between the East India Company and Raja Gulab Singh of Jammu

1925: Maharaja Hari Singh succeeds the throne

1932: Sheikh Abdullah becomes head of 'Muslim Conference'

1939: The Muslim Conference changes its name to the National Conference and moves closer to the Indian Nationalist movement

1947: Maharaja suppresses revolt in Poonch ruthlessly

OCTOBER 27, 1948: Large numbers of raiders cross from NWFP into Kashmir. Hari Singh asks for help from India and accedes. Indian troops arrive and thrust the invaders back.

1948: Abdullah becomes Prime Minister of Kashmir. Problems ensue between him and the Maharaja. Kashmir gets a special status in the Indian Constitution.

1948: India takes the Kashmir problem to the UNSC.

1949: On 1 January, a ceasefire between Indian and Pakistani forces leaves India in control of most of the valley, as well as Jammu and Ladakh, while Pakistan gains control of part of Kashmir including what Pakistan calls "Azad" Kashmir and Northern territories.

1949: On 17 October, the Indian Constituent Assembly adopts Article 370 of the Constitution, ensuring a special status and internal autonomy for Jammu and Kashmir.

1951: First post-independence elections. Abdullah wins unopposed.

1952: Kashmir and India reach an agreement on the flag, citizenship.

1953: Abdullah is dismissed as Prime Minister and arrested. He's replaced by Bakshi Ghulam Muhammad aka 'Bakshi the Builder'

1954: Kashmir's Constituent Assembly ratifies accession to India. The customs barrier between Kashmir and India is lifted.

1957: kashmir approves its constitution. Abdullah views this as a repudiation of the commitment to a plebescite. Aug 1965: Kashmiri nationalists Amanullah Khan and Maqbool Butt form another Plebiscite Front with an armed wing called the National Liberation Front (NLF) in POK.

1974: Kashmir Accord is signed by G. Parthasarathy for Indira Gandhi and Mirza Afzal Beg for Sheikh Abdullah. The Accord retains Kashmir's special status, but the state is termed as a 'constituent unit of the Union of India'.

1976: Maqbool Butt is arrested on his return to the Valley; Amanullah Khan moves to England and NLF becomes Jammu and Kashmir liberation Front (JKLF).

1987: The Muslim United Front (MUF) against Farooq's Conference- Congress alliance. MUF manages to win just 4 seats amidst rigging. The insurgency in the valley increases in momentum from this point on.

1990: At a march of 1 million, 40 Kashmiris are killed by police firing. 350,000 Pundits leave the Kashmir valley for refugee camps in Jammu amidst threat to life.

MAY 7, 1999: The Indian Army patrols detect intruders on Kargil ridges in Kashmir. India fights to regain lost territory.

2000: Hizbul Mujahedeen declares a unilateral ceasefire for three months. India begins peace talks.
This article is sourced from PR-CANADA.net, click here to read compelete article.

For More Info, Visit below mentioned articles

.
Prof Rajita Chaudhuri follow some off-beat trends like organizing make up sessions
IIPM BBA MBA Institute: Student Notice Board
Run after passion and not money, says Arindam Chaudhuri
IIPM’s Management Consulting Arm - Planman Consulting
Arindam Chaudhuri – Everything is not in our hands