Author: Rakesh Sinha
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: April 20, 2002
The opposition parties, some of
the allies of the NDA, and largely the media are in agreement on at least
one point: Removal of Mr Narendra Modi as the Chief Minister of Gujarat.
They presuppose the return of normalcy in the State with this move. But
how can Mr Modi's replacement, obviously by another RSS-man, would be a
"Secular advancement"? Or is the demand just to hit the NDA on the one
hand and to consolidate the Muslim vote bank at the national level on the
other? The State earned epithets like "Sangh Parivar's Laboratory" when
Keshubhai Patel was the Chief Minister. Thus Gujarat as a stronghold of
the RSS is unlikely to be tolerated by secularist forces irrespective of
individuals heading the Government.
When the Congressmen (Swarajists)
for the first time became ministers in the provinces under the Government
of India Act 1919, known as Dyarchy, they were unacceptable faces and bad
character for the British bureaucracy as well as pro-British media. It
was not far fetched since those who were described as goondas and perpetrators
of disturbances in the British India in the intelligence reports and the
pro-British media, were legitimate masters. It created an uncomfortable
environment for both the law and order agencies.
It is a matter of politico-administrative
assessment to gauge the success or failure of a particular chief minister
or state government. It is also applicable on Mr Modi. But the nature of
reporting, commentaries and news analyses in the (English) national indicate
motive far beyond objective assessment. It is not for the first time that
Gujarat has witnessed communal riots. Its history is replete with communal
tension and feuds.
In September 1969, Gujarat plunged
into one of the severest riots after Partition. The immediate reason for
the riot was attack on two sadhus of Jagannath Temple by a mob of about
1,000 Muslims, who gathered to celebrate Urs on September 18, 1969, provoking
organised violence in Ahmedabad and many other areas, including Baroda.
Official figure counted 660 dead and 1,100 injured. The magnitude of riots
could be gauged by the figure that 6000 families lost their houses, properties
and belongings. The Sampradayikta Virodhi Committee's report "Gujarat's
riot X-rayed" mentioned the figure of dead people as 3000.
"Religious-quake" was witnessed
during the riots. Incidents were reported but they did not unravel religious
identities of the victims. The Times of India reported on its front-page
on September 20, 1969, a father and son being burnt alive when the son
was taking his ailing father to hospital. Incidents like these hit our
humanitarian sentiment rather than religious or communal feelings, when
they are reported with restraint. They do not transcend the communal hatred
beyond the boundaries of the communally charged region or the State. This
spirit was maintained by the media throughout the riot-span (for a month)
in 1969. The 1969 riots were not transformed into a political battle to
destabilise the government or to blame the ruling Congress or to settle
scores with Hitendra Desai, the then Chief Minister of Gujarat. Prime Minister
Indira Gandhi's short visit on September 25 was both preceded and followed
by premeditated violence. Seventeen passengers were killed in the Janata
Express near Ahmedabad the same day. But the institution of the Prime Minister
was not trivialised or her stature was not questioned due to such horrendous
incidents.
However, things have changed. The
rise of the saffron brigade has probably turned the media both unfair and
unfriendly. Thus Messrs Vajpayee and Modi cannot expect similar treatment
from news (read campaign) papers. A simple fact stated by Mr Modi, that
riots in Gujarat were a reaction to the Godhra incident, was twisted to
prove the State Government was justifying post-Godhra violence. The secularists'
interpretation is itself fascist in nature. They find Godhra incidental
and riots thereafter as premeditated!
The biographer of Elan Marx (grand
daughter of Karl Marx), a veteran journalist, wrote that inaccuracy is
a professional hazard of journalists. When the unfortunate violence took
place in Sabarmati Ashram, it was reported that for the first time in its
60 years, violence took place there. During 1969 riots, The Times of India
reported, "Sabarmati Harijan Ashram too not spared" (September 23, 2002)
as hooligans attacked the Ashramites and damaged the ashram. Another interesting
theory of Godhra incident was that Ghanchis not Muslims were responsible
for riots.
I do not know whether it is an instance
of deliberate inaccuracy or ignorance. "Ghanchi Muslims were," wrote Asghar
Ali Engineer in his book, Communal Riots in the Post-Independent India:
"By and large supporters of the Muslim League and were also known as quite
militant and aggressive." Perhaps BJP leaders like Shanta Kumar could not
comprehend the role of anti-saffron gorillas in the media to damn the ideology
by using the symbols of Jhabua, Godse, Dara Singh, even at the cost of
serving the interests of rapists and anti-nationals operating through various
names and masquerading as human rights activists, like Prof Gilani, or
religious propagators under the Deendar Anjum, or supporters of pan-Islamic
terrorism under the softer name "Students Islamic Movement."
(The writer teaches political science
at Delhi University)
