Vajpayee’s Ayodhya Move:
UNDER THE pretext of resolving the Ayodhya dispute through the Kanchi Shankaracharya’s proposal, the Vajpayee-led government has yet again tried to set the mandir/masjid issue as a central agenda of debate in the country. The liberal camp may choose to maintain the illusion of Vajpayee being a liberal, and sections of the Sangh brigade in their internal power struggle may bestow the title of ‘Lauh purush’ (Iron man) or ‘Vikas purush’ (Progress man) on anyone they choose; the reality remains that Vajpayee has played a key role in the BJP’s gameplan of giving popular currency to communal ideology which brands minorities as ‘enemies of peace’. Capitalist landlord politics in India often responds to specific situations by developing popular leaders who are experts at exploiting the emotions of the masses. Indira Gandhi institutionalised autocratic, anti-democracy forces in the name of ‘Garibi Hatao’, similarly using a so-called liberal face Atal Bihari Vajpayee has championed and propagated communal, militarist fascism.
The Shankaracharya of Kanchi Kamakoti Peeth, Jayendra Saraswati, was the central figure in Vajpayee’s latest gameplan. The Vajpayee govt. last used him for political purposes in March 2002, and even then, the Shankaracharya’s role had become fairly controversial. However this time he has fared no better than a Sangh activist. In the proposal send to the Muslim Personal Law Board, the Shankaracharya had said; (1) Your board, on our request, can consider giving a no-objection letter regarding temple construction on the undisputed/acquired land; (2) After some time discussions regarding disputed land can also be done and a peaceful agreement can be put forward to the court which can then reach a verdict based on that agreement; 3) To protect the disputed area, a wall can be constructed separating this area from undisputed/acquired land; 4) If we can reach an agreement regarding the disputed area through dialogue, then both sides will ensure support for this agreement from within our own religious groups/ subgroups; and 5) To make this agreement effective and for its time-bound implementation we will send it to the Indian government.
In response to this proposal, when the Muslim Personal Law Board (MPLB) sought clarifications on some points, the Shankaracharya in his letter dated July1, in a way rejected his earlier proposal and asked for the disputed land to be handed over to Hindus. Not only this, in an interview given on television on July 5, he sounded almost threatening, saying that Muslims should hand over not only Ayodhya but also Kashi and Mathura to Hindus, since they will in any case have to do this at some point in future. Therefore, it was in fact the Shankaracharya who had rejected his own proposal under pressure from RSS!
This time, the Vajpayee govt. had even managed to fool its critics into believing that it was making a serious attempt to resolve the Ayodhya dispute, with Assembly and Parliamentary polls in the offing. Many believed that since the Vajpayee govt. has not accomplished much on domestic and external fronts, it therefore sincerely wants to resolve the issues of Ayodhya and Kashmir. They thought Vajpayee’s attempts were being opposed by fundamentalist Hindu forces. Seeing the way in which the RSS had adopted an attacking posture towards the government, many began to believe that the proposal must contain something that was against its interests. It seems that in the atmosphere of ‘shadow boxing’ between the government and various constituents of the RSS, the MPLB too could not understand the political essence of the Shankaracharya’s proposal. Taking this proposal to be something positive, they did not make it public. The Congress also took an interest in this proposal, though they are now trying to shrug off their own responsibility. Instead of hitting at the BJP’s mandir politics and their dubious proposals they are trying to blame the failure of the proposal on the fact that Vajpayee could not put his own house into order. Actually the Congress is also getting ready to play the Hindu card in coming elections and wants to compete with the BJP on the mandir issue. For a left party like the CPM, the strategy of combating the communal campaign of the RSS rests primarily on utilising the contradictions between various capitalist-landlord parties. Not only do they exaggerate contradictions within NDA, they give a lot of importance to contradictions between BJP and RSS and even within BJP i.e. between Atal and Advani. They should not overlook the complementary role played by all constituents of RSS in politicising the mandir issue. In the meeting of their All India Executive body, held on 5-6th july, RSS supported the initiative taken by the Shankaracharya and asked the central government to explore the possibilities of introducing a Bill in the parliament, in case the Muslim leadership were to stubbornly reject the proposal. It is clear that in the coming elections, the RSS wants to appeal to the masses to support a BJP majority so that a Bill on temple construction may be passed.
However, RSS has not been successful in proving Muslims as stubborn and mainly responsible for impeding the peace process. The abortive gameplan involving the Shankaracharya was geared to this effect. Instead it is the BJP which has come under fire. It has become clear from the excavations at Ayodhya under the supervision of ASI that there is no evidence of a temple under the Babri Masjid. Deposing before the Liberhan Commission, the karsevaks accused in Babri demolition case have named leaders like Advani, Joshi and Uma Bharti as chief instigators of the demolition. People also believe that the court verdict may go against the Sangh Parivar. In a situation where famine deaths are taking place, farmers are committing suicides, unemployment is on the rise, the threat of WTO is looming large, and politics is returning towards the issues of the common man, the RSS is hell bent on trying to orient mass anger in a communal direction. They must be defeated at every cost and every single fascist attack by them must be countered by the upsurge of popular movements.
Those who demolished the mosque are now in power, and they have predictably abused their position to push the CBI into dropping the conspiracy charges against Advani and the other BJP leaders. The democratic movement must at this stage reiterate its demand for stringent punishment for the likes of Advani and all those who, by demolishing the masjid have tried to destroy our common heritage and have committed the crime of trying to reverse the process of the formation of a modern, democratic, secular nation-state.
The basic principles of justice demand the restoration of a mosque on the site of the demolition. Whether through dialogue, court or legislation, no temple can be allowed to replace the demolished mosque. Any options other than the mosque, such as a national monument commemorating 1857, can be considered only if they emerge through a thoroughly transparent, democratic process of dialogue. Above all, the conspiracy to bring the mandir issue to the centre-stage should be thwarted at any cost.
— Akhilendra Pratap Singh