 |
||
|
||
|
||
One significant feature of the expansion of the BSP-BJP government
in Uttar Pradesh is the inclusion of four Muslims. It seems more
than what the Muslims could manage under 'secular' dispensations,
and appears all the more impressive when viewed against the
backdrop of angry protests against inadequate representation to the
groups considered loyal to the BJP. Under normal circumstances,
the BJP may have attacked the allocation of four berths to Muslims
as disproportionate, and perhaps, as another glaring evidence of
'appeasement.' In the present case, however, they have not only
gone along with the idea to make the coalition government truly
representative but have contributed to the efforts by giving Aizaz
Rizvi a berth from their quota.
It may riot be too far fetched to suggest that the BJP's gesture
towards the minority community is because of the realisation that
persistence with its extreme majoritarianism does not pay much,
when the party is in no position to capture power at the Centre,
either on its own or with its limited number of allies. Emotions
whipped up by the party over the Ayodhya issue might have helped it
make impressive gains, but that was certainly not enough. The party
desperately needs to expand its support base, which has clearly
plateaued beyond its core Hindutva constituency. More so, after the
loss of the emotional potency of its temple plank. That explains
why the party, in alliance with its more extremist partner the Shiv
Sena, has been trying to win over Muslims in Maharashtra. This has
worked as Shiv Sena could win the Behrampada, a Muslim-majority
ward in Mumbai, in the recent civic elections. The promise to put
the Ayodhya issue on pause played no small role in BJP's success in
clinching a power-sharing pact in Uttar Pradesh. Certainly, this
is not enough proof to suggest a genuine change of heart or real
desire on the part of the Hindutva formations to change their
stripes. But these are certainly welcome if they, at least, mark
the beginning of a process, even if only for reasons of political
expediency and the logic inherent in the era of coalitions, which
restores moderation and acts as a check on extremism.
|
||
|
||
|
||