Author: Neerja Chowdhury
Publication: The Indian Express
Date: March 10, 2004
Speaking to Neerja Chowdhury, Arif
Mohammad Khan explained why he chose the BJP over the Congress as the 'credible
instrument' to 'correct' society. Excerpts from the interview:
. You opposed the BJP until not
so long ago, and now you have joined the party. Was your earlier perception
wrong, for surely the party has not changed so much, or is it a reflection
on your own judgement?
It was the Congress which initiated
the process of communalisation of politics by its decision on Shah Bano
and by opening the locks at Ayodhya. Even before the BJP started to take
advantage of that situation, I could foresee it. The Congress was the sinner
and the BJP the beneficiary of this politics.
As I have said, my impression of
BJP was based more on personal interactions I had with Atalji and Advaniji
and other BJP leaders. What I did not realise was that they are also a
political party. If the Congress was using the Muslim card and the Hindu
card - and later V P Singh used the Backward card - you could not expect
the BJP to retire to the hills and run an ashram there.
. So you have a greater understanding
of their compulsions today?
That, however, is not the reason
for my joining the BJP.
. What then is the real reason?
The reason is that there is a need
to do something drastic about the present situation.
. Meaning?
After 1986, I had no truck with
the Congress. I spent 120 days in Gujarat in 2002, and for nine days I
campaigned for the Congress party. I saw the manner in which the Congress
campaigned as a party which claims to uphold the ideal of secularism. Normally
they give tickets to 20-24 Muslims, but in this election they gave only
four tickets to Muslims, and announced shamelessly that winnability was
the sole criteria. One expected a party like the Congress to say that even
if all our candidates lose we will not allow the community to feel marginalised.
. So you expected the Congress to
go to the hills and set up an ashram there?
That is precisely the point I am
making. It is not a party or an individual that is the villain. Political
parties reflect the prevailing trends in society. When Sonia Gandhi did
not go to Ehsan Jaffri's house, it was not that she had suddenly become
communal. She was showing a sensitivity to societal pressures. When the
Congress fielded only four Muslim candidates, or when it refused to withdraw
the candidature of 14 who had charges of murder and looting against them,
they were responding to the same pressures. I am not blaming the Congress.
By attacking a party or an individual
we are not going to find a solution. We have to correct the trends which
prevail in society. After Gujarat I came to the conclusion that you can
fight a government and a political party but you cannot fight civil society.
If you think something vicious is there, you have to address it at a different
level.
. You are admitting that there is
communal viciousness?
The viciousness is there. The situation
was most effectively summed up by K P S Gill. After Gujarat, he said that
never in his entire police career, had he seen such an absence of remorse
after such incidents. Can you correct this by attacking one individual,
the PM or the Home Minister? You can't engage in a political fight against
civil society.
. How then do you tackle civil society?
Fighting communalism is nothing
but fighting the selfishness of a group. It is totally different from fighting
other evils. In class war you are fighting against the 'other'. But here
the fight starts against your own communalism, and that of people close
to you. It is after that that you keep extending the scope of the fight.
When your bonafides are proved, others start listening to you.
. Has your view of Gujarat changed?
One change has come. I feel the
solution does not lie in attacking or criticising individuals or parties.
It lies in correcting trends in society. Once I came to that conclusion,
I had to search for the credible instrument which had the capacity to correct
these distortions.
. Why not the Congress as an instrument?
I supported the Congress in the
Gujarat election on the advice of my friends, but they failed miserably.
This was not just a political failure. It was due to the fact that their
credibility had totally eroded in the last 15 years.
Suddenly I realised the BJP is telling
me 'you come into the party, we want to correct the distortions in our
image, we want to take everyone along.' Today an environment of hostility
has been created, I am not going into who did it. They are conscious of
this, of the gulf that exists between them and a section of society.
The PM wants to manage the contradictions.
He does not want to see himself as the leader of one section or of just
a cadre-based party. He wants to be acceptable to all. This desire is so
obvious from his speeches and the manner in which he conducts himself.
. Are you planning to change the
perception of the RSS towards the Muslims or of the Muslims towards the
RSS?
Neither. Maybe when I am there,
and whenever I feel that their perception is not rooted in reality, I'll
give my view. If it works, fine. I want to create goodwill with the RSS.
I know that without their goodwill, this distortion in society, the viciousness
which comes out of communalism, of which Gujarat was a crude manifestation,
cannot be addressed.
. So you have decided that if you
cannot beat them, join them?
They are extending their hand, they
say they want to correct the situation. We have to catch hold of this extended
hand.
. What do you propose to say to
Narendra Modi when you meet him?
I am going to meet him. That is
high on my agenda. Community leaders (in Ahmedabad) who have been engaged
in rehabilitation work are waiting for me to arrive. They want to have
communication with Narendra Modi and their Hindu neighbours. The organisation
that can facilitate this process today in Gujarat is the Sangh Parivar.
. But my question was what will
you say to Modi?
I'll not tell him anything. I only
want the process of talks to speed up. When communication is established,
suspicion and distrust will reduce. 'Toone kabhi dushman se lipat kar nahin
dekha, Tu parchame nafrat ko lehrata hee raha.' You have only been flaunting
the flag of hatred, you have never tried to embrace the person who is your
enemy. I say ek baar lipat kar tho dekho.
In the Koransharief it says, ''Perhaps
Allah will make friendship between you and those you hold as your enemy.
And Allah is forgiving and most merciful.'' Kahin na kahin apko bhoolna
hee parhta hai, cheeson ko chorhna parhta hai.
. Does this mean that Muslims ko
jhuk kar rehna parhega?
People who view national life as
a saudebaazi will come to that conclusion, but those who have a sense of
history will not see it that way. If mutual goodwill is restored where
is the question of jhuk kar rehna?
