The Hindu : The Ayodhya tangle

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Wednesday, Mar 13, 2002

Opinion

Opinion - News Analysis

The Ayodhya tangle

By Sudhanshu Ranade

The enormous amount of suppressio veri, suggestio falsi that surrounds the latest phase of the struggle for `Ramrajya', sapping the country's strength even as it stands poised on the brink of war, has made it difficult for laymen to understand what exactly is at stake. Because of this, there has been a great deal of bitterness about the `spoiler' role being played by those who `unreasonably oppose even a symbolic puja on March 15; that too on land on which the Muslim community has no claim whatsoever'.

This whisper campaign must be squarely confronted. It has to be brought to light, and ruthlessly exposed, otherwise it will corrupt the judgment of many decent and sober people; M. Rama Jois, former Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, for instance.

With just a couple of days to go for `D-Day' and hardly any time left to undo the enormous damage that would unwittingly be caused, he allowed himself to be talked into going public with a clear, forceful and at first sight compelling article on the bhoomi puja at Ayodhya; "to remove the wrong impression created in the minds of the people that the Vishwa Hindu Parishad is proposing to commence construction of Ram mandir on the disputed site at Ayodhya against the court order, which has created tension among the people. In fact, the VHP is only proposing to commence construction on totally undisputed land belonging to Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas. It is this same undisputed land on which shilanyas was done during November 1989.

The Muslim community has no interest at all in this land; their rightful interest is only in respect of the disputed land as clearly stated in the 1994 Supreme Court judgment — which ordered the then status quo to be maintained. This fact should be made known to the people in general and Muslims in particular to avoid unnecessary tension, enmity and social disharmony by creating a non-existent dispute over undisputed land".

Reasonable though this appeal might seem at first, it is in fact based on what is in effect a vicious lie. Even if we concede all the facts vouched for by Mr. Jois, the larger fact is that the status quo was irreversibly changed on December 6, 1992. Till that date it was certainly true that what the VHP did with the land under the control of the Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas was no business of the Muslims. But the VHP refused to exercise that right. It refused to be content with anything less than the destruction of the masjid — the title to which, too, was undisputed till not so very long ago. Not the least bit concerned about the thousands of lives that have already been lost (indeed it has been threatening that the future will be worse), the VHP has been insisting all along that the `temple' shall and must have its sanctum sanctorum at the spot where the Babri Masjid once stood.

The Supreme Court is expected to give its ruling a few hours from now, but there is little room for hope. The VHP, while complaining long and loud over the ``unduly delayed'' verdict, has made it quite clear that it is "willing to accept" the court's decision only if it is in its favour. As for the Prime Minister, Atal Behari Vajpayee, he has been busy with a little whisper campaign of his own, by making public statements that he expects the court to keep the sentiments of the `people' in mind, and the fact that "it is only a question of one day". (Just as in the case of the Uttar Pradesh elections when he went around threatening Muslims with the thought that "even without their support the BJP would win'').

A `favourable' judgment would be an easy way for Mr. Vajpayee to put off the day of reckoning — to carry the problem over, perhaps indefinitely, for his successor to deal with. But it is not going to be that easy or painless for the rest of us. It is not only Hindu and Muslim lives that are at stake in the case of this godforsaken `temple' (as Jayendra Saraswati of Kanchi has rightly pointed out, with such a bloody and inauspicious beginning nothing good can ever come of it). India's reputation is at stake as well.

The longer Ayodhya is allowed to fester, the longer we allow ourselves to think in terms of tackling `contingencies' when and where they arise, the more serious the problem will become. Large groups of intensely agitated people are difficult to anticipate, and impossible to control; and then the vicious circle begins all over again.

If someone asks you to believe that he proposes to stop stampeding horses by standing bravely in their way whenever and wherever they run amuck, you can be sure that he isn't even going to try. It is the reins that we need to keep a tight grip on, to ensure that things are not allowed to get out of control in the first place; that serious apprehensions are not allowed to develop; that tempers remain calm. Better still, perhaps we could honour each of our leaders, individually, with a well-deserved vacation in the cool, green foothills of the Himalayas.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

Stories in this Section

Mr. Modi must go

Straitened circumstances

The U.S. and India: setting the focus