Ayodhya verdict - Reminiscences

Nearly 3 decades ago, on December 6, 1992, a long-running dispute between Hindus and Muslims over a religious site in the northern city of Ayodhya took a dramatic turn (Babri Masjid demolished) and changed the course of Indian politics forever. Religious riots erupted, and 900 people, both Muslims and Hindus, were killed in Mumbai. And on March 12, 1993, 13 blasts ripped through the Mumbai city in retaliation for the mosque’s demolition, killing 317. Now, a verdict from the Supreme Court (on Nov 9, 2019) has legally closed the most divisive religious conflict and paved the way for the construction of a Hindu temple at the site. The court has insisted that a mosque also be built, but on an alternative plot of land.  This SC decision will allow the BJP and Modi government to bolster its political fortunes further by construction of a grand Ram temple just ahead of elections in Uttar Pradesh due in March 2022.

• Real closure of the conflict will depend on how, going forward, India treats its more than 175 million Muslim citizens. Anything other than equitable justice will only leave deep scars and gaping wounds.
• Since there has been no violence and protests, we should not mistake this for indifference. But this doesn't entail Muslims accepting the construction of a Ram temple at the site. The court has said that the demolition of the mosque was “a serious violation of the rule of law” and that “it is necessary to provide restitution to the Muslim community for the unlawful destruction of their place of worship.”  Justice in the Babri masjid demolition case is critical to Indian democracy’s promise of fair play and equality.
• In the 2019 election, BJP fielded only seven Muslim candidates. In the 2017 assembly elections in Uttar Pradesh, where the temple will be built and has 19.3% Muslims (about 4.40 crores), the BJP did not field any Muslim candidates. India owes it to Muslim citizens to address this sense of political marginalization.
• It was the Muslims who suffered the razing of their place of worship; they were also the victims of the violence which followed. The community sought redressal and placed its faith in the institutions for justice. The Supreme Court ruling is riddled with contradictions but its biggest problem is the loss of faith it has triggered among Muslims about the possibility of justice. What can be worse for a democracy when its largest minority group does not hope for justice but fearfully settles for a verdict that they know is no less than injustice to them? -- Arfa Khanum Sherwani writes in thewire.in
• Whatever the provocation from Pakistan and whatever the indignities and horrors inflicted on non-Muslims there, we have to deal with this minority [India’s Muslims] in a civilized manner. If we fail to do so, we shall have a festering sore. -- Jawaharlal Nehru

If Babri Masjid was still standing, would SC have had it demolished? 

-- Justice A.K. Ganguly (Retd Judge of Supreme Court)

The PM Modi's appeal for harmony, on the eve of the Ayodhya verdict, and warning against seeing the outcome as a victory or defeat for either side casts doubts about his prior knowledge and influencing the judgement. Muslims may grudgingly and helplessly accept this verdict with a pinch of salt but in the reverse scenario, Hindu groups (RSS, VHP etc) would definitely have pressurized central government to promulgate ordinance allotting Babri Masjid plot for Ram Janmabhoomi temple construction.

What Modi will do now?

Narendra Modi's spectacular win in the general elections 2019, and returning to power by an astonishing margin -- defying expectations, leaving the political opposition gutted and securing nearly two-thirds of the Lok Sabha. This election has proved how wildly popular Modi really is. The big question is: What is he going to do with that? He will probably continue along the same path.

• But there is a sizable chunk of India that voted against Modi, and many members of this anti-Modi crowd are deeply worried about his having a stronger hand.
• They see India as increasingly divided along caste and religious fault lines and an emboldened  Modi will send India farther down the path of becoming a religious Hindu state, which could be dangerous for minorities.
• Hindu extremists did very well in the election. Though Modi has not publicly used their same language, he has also done nothing yet to separate himself from them.
• Modi is not a soft liner. Modi’s deepening reliance on Amit Shah is a sign of the agenda ahead. Amit Shah is the man who recently referred to illegal Muslim immigrants as termites.
• Modi will come under pressure from within BJP to deliver on contentious planks of the party including building Ram temple over the ruins of a destroyed mosque in Ayodhya, abrogate Article 370 for Kashmir and removing special protections that allow India’s minority Muslim community to follow its own system of family law.
• Modi has no reason to deviate from the core agenda, because he received an unprecedented mandate despite the poor economic record and social disharmony.
• India’s path forward during Modi’s second term hinges on just who the real Modi might be.
• Those who studied Modi (68) say he is a complicated man: isolated, ascetic, trusting few, close to even fewer; a blend of populist, nationalist and a self-made success story. He is passionate about his Hindu beliefs and committed to economic development.
• After 5 years, the economy is not doing well and Modi is aware of how economy could define both his legacy and his future political fortunes.
• Modi has demonstrated desire to take his place on the global stage as the leader of world economic super power.
• In Kashmir, Modi might try to tighten control. So far India’s attempts to stamp out dissent have bred only growing resistance. Any further pressure put on Kashmir could mean more tension with Pakistan. Part of Modi’s election surge came from his appearing tough on Pakistan, trading military strikes across the border. The brinkmanship caused anxiety around the world, and Modi may well decide to continue that stance.
• Given the electoral victory he just won, he is unlikely to see any reason to change what has worked for him.
• At the top of his priorities is the urgency to create more jobs, and that is likely to require new laws to grant the government the power of eminent domain to seize land for companies to use to build factories.

Read  the source article

India is at the whim of one man

This election has produced the strongest government India has had. Even Jawaharlal Nehru did not have as much control over his party as Modi does. There was something surreal about this election. The fact that we've reached a point where truth does not seem to matter and that is a dangerous point for a democracy because democracy survives on the fragmentation of power. When people trust each other and distrust their leaders, you get democracy. When people distrust each other and completely trust their leaders, you get dictatorship. We are at the second moment right now. Armed with full majority, non existent opposition and tamed institutions -- Modi will continue with renewed vigor his hate filled destructive and disruptive policies. Only empty coffers, economic, agriculture and unemployment  problems will control him to certain extent.

Modi's thinking big has style and no substance.

• For Modi, “thinking big” is essentially about showcasing “our strengths” [like bullet train] and not necessarily bringing any benefit to the people.
• Modi's another big idea is building a Statue of Unity to commemorate Sardar Patel, India’s first Deputy Prime Minister, and fixing its height at 186 metres, twice as tall as the Statue of Liberty (United States), exposing fascination for spectacle that the politician, termed widely “as the most powerful after Indira Gandhi”, nourishes within his political self.
• Modi’s penchant for thinking big has a chilling similarity with Mussolini’s Fascist Italy is that in the Mussolini regime, politics starts to be less concerned with the act of governing people in an efficient way, for instance, in solving their economic problems. Instead, it is focused more on the spectacle of power, on the visual and impressive display of symbols, myths and rituals. In terms of everyday life this anesthetization of political power takes the shape of a domination of form of visual appearance, effects over the content. It also means that politics ceases to be measured by political criteria. Politics itself assumes the form of an artistic act; to govern means to Mussolini to create a new Nation and a new Empire and Mussolini views himself as the creative soul of the nation, the propeller of new ways of living. 
• Modi and other leaders of the BJP had repeatedly promised, through the 2014 Lok Sabha election campaign and even after the formation of the government, that the farmers’ income across the country would be doubled by 2022. Three years into that promise, while FM Jaitley said it was for State governments to initiate measures to double the farmers’ income, Modi has exhorted cooperative societies to come up with their own facilitation.
• Modi regime has been repeatedly claiming that India’s economic situation is good and that it has the potential to improve despite global recession. But Jaitley had to admit that the economy had decelerated to the slowest pace in three years and that there was a need for more concentrated and specific efforts to revive growth. The demonetisation by Modi in Nov 2016 which aggravated economic deceleration, was strongly denied by government but were eventually forced to admit it.
• RSS has taken note of the repeated reverses suffered by the Modi government.The RSS leadership warned the BJP to be wary of a repeat of the 2004 electoral defeat suffered by AB Vajpayee who faced the 2004 elections with  “India Shining” campaign only to be humbled by a practically leaderless but united opposition. The BJP leadership, including party president and Modi’s close associate Amit Shah, has taken the RSS warning seriously.
• First, they would fall back on their time tested ploy of communalising society and polarising communities in the name of religion. Now that Modi and his Ministry are increasingly displaying their inability to live up to their development vision, they would revive the Ayodhya Ram Mandir agitation for this. 
• The second response would be by appropriating gains made by other governments as their own through clever propaganda and media management. Even as Chief Minister, Modi had shown his mastery over this stratagem when he took credit for the Amul dairy, set up originally in 1946, and nurtured under several regimes, including the Congress but then Modi’s propaganda and media management is what prevailed in the end.
• Arun Shourie terms the Modi Ministry essentially as an event management company where everything is turned into a spectacle for one individual and a clutch of political courtiers.
• The opinion that the ruling BJP in Gujarat needs a booster to face elections in 2018 and that is why Modi inaugurated the Sardar Sarovar dam and initiated the work on the bullet train. But field reports suggest that the BJP continues to be on a strong wicket in the State because of the absence of a cohesive opposition and a popular leader in the Congress.
• New spectacles on display in Sep 2017 are aimed at reinforcing the omnipotence of the big leader. That task is of utmost importance given the warnings emanating from different quarters of the country and the RSS.

Essentially Modi's propaganda machine produced results in 2014 based on anti-incumbency factor faced by Congress/UPA. But in 2019 elections Modi's propaganda machine without any other support might not be able to repeat 2014. On the contrary, one more mistake by Modi, similar to failed demonetization or badly implemented mangled GST and some improvement by Rahul Gandhi & Congress could spell doom for BJP & Modi. Another 18 months to go, Modi leader of a dud team, will surely do one or two or even more blunders because one can't expect Modi doing nothing as he gets wonderful ideas on and often. Modi won't realize that he will do least harm to BJP and himself, if does nothing till 2019 elections.

Hindu Raj: Ambedkar’s warning

• Proponents of Hindu supremacy knew that democracy could be used to establish a Hindu Raj. They and their followers have sought to use the vote for ends of power using the Hindutva card.
• If Hindu Raj does become a fact, it will, no doubt, be the greatest calamity for this country.… Hindu Raj must be prevented at any cost - wrote B.R. Ambedkar in 1946. He was against majoritarianism, which in the Indian context meant unbridled rule of the majority community, the Hindus.
• Unfortunately for the minorities in India, Indian nationalism has developed a new doctrine which may be called the Divine Right of the Majority to rule the minorities according to the wishes of the majority. Any claim for the sharing of power by the minority is called communalism, while the monopolising of the whole power by the majority is called nationalism. Under these circumstances there is no way left but to have the rights of the Scheduled Castes embodied in the Constitution. 
• In the forties, even Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel was sometimes accused of being soft on the Hindu Revanchists, who believe in and practised tit-for-tat in that turbulent and fateful period.
• Patel’s retort to BM Birla on announcement of Independence: “I also feel happy that the announcement of June 3, 1947 at least settles things one way or the other. There is no further uncertainty. I do not think it will be possible to consider Hindustan as a Hindu state with Hinduism as the state religion. We must not forget that there are other minorities whose protection is our primary responsibility. The state must exist for all, irrespective of caste or creed.”
• Ambedkar was perceptive. It is not necessary to declare India a Hindu state formally by amending the Constitution and making Hinduism the state religion. The same result can be achieved by administrative measures. The Supreme Court has held secularism to be part of the basic structure of the Constitution which cannot be discarded even by constitutional amendment.
• Ambedkar thought that the elaborate constitutional provisions on administration would work. He told the Constituent Assembly on November 4, 1948, when he moved for the adoption of the Draft Constitution: “While everybody recognises the necessity of the diffusion of constitutional morality for the peaceful working of a democratic Constitution, there are two things interconnected with it which are not, unfortunately, generally recognised. One is that the form of administration has a close connection with the form of the Constitution. The form of the administration must be appropriate to and in the same sense as the form of the Constitution. The other is that it is perfectly possible to pervert the Constitution, without changing its form, by merely changing the form of the administration and to make it inconsistent and opposed to the spirit of the Constitution. Can we presume such a diffusion of constitutional morality? Constitutional morality is not a natural sentiment. It has to be cultivated. We must realise that our people have yet to learn it. Democracy in India is only a top-dressing on an Indian soil, which is essentially undemocratic”.
• The leaders of the Congress sought to inculcate secularism right from the first Congress held at Bombay in 1885. S. Srinivasa Aiyangar, president of the 41st Congress in 1926, articulated the credo of secularism very ably. So did Vallabhbhai Patel in the presidential address to the 45th Congress at Karachi in 1931. Hindu-Muslim “unity can only come when the majority takes courage in both hands and is prepared to change places with the minority. That would be the highest wisdom.”
• But by then, forces that did not share the Congress’ ideology, did not participate in the freedom movement and were charged with revivalist hate had come to the fore.
• Nehru once remarked that Hindu communalism was the Indian version of fascism, and, in the case of the RSS, it is not difficult to perceive certain similarities. The leader principle, the stress on militarism, the doctrine of racial-cultural superiority, ultra-nationalism infused with religious idealism, the use of symbols of past greatness, the emphasis on national solidarity, the exclusion of religious or ethnic minorities from the nation-concept—all of these features of the RSS are highly reminiscent of fascist movements in Europe.
• With an RSS pracharak, Narendra Modi, known for his antipathy towards Muslims, as Prime Minister, and Yogi Adityanath chosen by him as Chief Minister of India’s largest State, Uttar Pradesh, we have crossed the threshold to a Hindu state. The BJP’s presidential candidate, Ram Nath Kovind, is “deeply rooted in the ideological stream of the RSS”. A brand new rubber stamp has been manufactured for the Rashtrapati Bhavan, 25 years after the last rubber stamp, R. Venkataraman.
• We now have a Prime Minister whose Hindutva puts Vajpayee’s Hindutva in the shade. Lynchings of Muslims has become common. So are cries for a Hindu state. Yogi Adityanath said on the Hindu Swaraj Diwas that no Indian should be hesitant about being proud of his or her Hindu identity.
• The drive will pick up speed. Modi made blatantly communal speeches during the Uttar Pradesh election campaign, as 65 former civil servants recalled in their open letter. He will do worse for the Lok Sabha elections in 2019. He aims to claim that he has fulfilled the BJP’s triple demand. His Kashmir adventure had “solved” the problem. For a uniform civil code, no other Prime Minister has so relentlessly campaigned for a reform of Muslim law. As far as the Ram temple at Ayodhya is concerned, he will say: “have patience, I have crossed the threshold to a Hindu state in India. Can’t you see the dread on the faces of Muslims, Christians, Dalits and other minorities?

My View:
Democracy in its true spirit is rule by people. Among all models, the model of rule by majority is the most popular and probably the best. That doesn't mean that minorities can be thrashed out by majority. Rule of the law must prevail. This Hindutva philosophy will only lead to civil war, sooner or later. In a democracy, ruled by majority, it is the duty of majority to uphold the rights & dignity of minorities. Polarization of people on the lines of religion, caste or creed - is not democracy. It is only a distortion and perversion. In a society corrupted with religious extremism all constitutional provisions and laws of the land will not work properly and the country will be heading for anarchy. When constitution fails, it is mafia that rules and then nation will be heading for disintegration!

A comfortable old age is the reward of a well-spent youth

The excesses of our youth, are drafts upon our old age, 

payable with interest, about thirty years after date ... CC Colton

The Supreme Court's directive to complete the conspiracy trial against BJP leaders accused of conspiracy to demolish the Babri Masjid could mean the deserved denouement of Lal Krishna Advani's career. Advani's career was built on Babri Masjid, on the saugandh that a Ram Mandir would be built in its place and nowhere else. If Advani gets indicted for the demolition of the structure in Ayodhya, life would have come full circle for him.

There shouldn't be an iota of doubt that Advani, now 89 years, was the architect of the movement that led to the demolition of the disputed mosque on Dec 6, 1992. His rath yatras led to mass hysteria that mobilised thousands of youth for the sectarian movement. It is for the courts to decide if Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi, Uma Bharti, Kalyan Singh and other BJP leaders accused in the case actually conspired to get the structure razed or not. But, none of them can escape the moral and political responsibility of their failure to control the monster they unleashed on India and in Ayodhya.

Advani has always denied that he was aware of plans to forcibly demolish the structure. He has claimed that the sight of lumpen kar sevaks pulling the structure brought tears to his eyes. Other versions suggest that they are in fact tears of joy when their conspiracy came to fruition on Dec 6, 1992. Advani played up the kamandal card ruthlessly throughout the tumultuous period between 1989 and 1992. He was single-handedly responsible for taking the BJP from 2 seats in 1984 to 117 in 1991 and his ambition to become the prime minister is clear.

For the BJP, the SC order could be a blessing in disguise. To the party it could mean an opportunity to keep the Hindutva pot boiling and serving the Ram Mandir issue hot in the 2019 elections. The trial is bound to get a lot of attention and in the end turn out a PR heist for the Hindutva brigade. In the dusk of his life, he could become the rath on which his party could ride to the next electoral victory. Just that, like in the 90s, he might not be the beneficiary of his final yatra, either to jail (if he is indicted) or to freedom (if he is found not guilty). Wouldn't that be adequate punishment for Advani's karma that led to the bloodshed every time he roared: Saugandh Ram ki khaate hain, mandir wahin banayenge?

A comfortable old age is the reward of a well-spent youth ... Maurice Chevalier

My View:
The fact that BJP etc have given written assurances that they would not demolish Babri Masjid for obtaining permission to conclude 'Rath Yatra' in Ayodhya and failed is one aspect. The other aspect is that gigantic structure demolition and removing debris using construction equipment would have taken few days where as 'Kar Sevaks' using hand tools only have demolished the structure, cleared debris and installed make shift 'Ram Mandir' in flat 6 hours, without any causalities, indicates the well designed, equipped and rehearsaled conspiracy, with secrecy well maintained, speaks volumes about the criminality of the issue for which LK Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi, Uma Bharti, Kalyan Singh and other BJP leaders can't be absolved of their crime and must be punished. However after 25 years, mobilising witnesses for their trial is no easy task for CBI and with Modi & BJP in power at Centre and also in UP, it is quite possible that the trial will end up as a farce. However Advani will go down in history as destroyer of Babri Masjid and pushing secularism into peril and paving way for Hindutva, much to the discomfort of minorities.

Post independence in India, Hindu population is growing arithmetically where as Muslim population is growing geometrically and by 2051/61 Muslim population will surpass Hindu population in India. Then what?