The Hindu : Sangh Parivar prevarications

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Thursday, May 08, 2003

Opinion

Opinion - Leader Page Articles

Sangh Parivar prevarications

By Surendra Mohan

Swadeshi, service of the poor ... all that the BJP had been promising the electorate throughout its existence has been given the go-by...However, frenzied Hindutva remains a trump card to quieten dissent.

LEADERS OF the Sangh Parivar got together recently in a bid to resolve differences among them. That a grouping which has completed 79 years of its existence and whose members have been Ministers in State Governments from 1967 on various occasions and the Union Government, uninterruptedly, since 1998 should develop fundamental differences within is not surprising. However, the Sangh has followed the principle of having only one leader, and that is why there is surprise. Possibly, fundamental divisions developed only after it assumed power in 1998 and continued with even greater vigour the economic policy laid down by the Congress. It is necessary, nevertheless, to look at some developments which took place earlier.

The Bharatiya Jana Sangh was formed in 1951, in violation of the word that the RSS had given to Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel in 1950 that it would not engage in political activity. It, in fact, abused the tragedy of the sad demise of the great Sardar who owing to his strong commitment to secularism had compelled the RSS to give him that pledge. It got some boost in 1953 when its founder-president, Shyama Prasad Mookerji, breathed his last in a jail in Jammu and Kashmir. However, several heads of the Jana Sangh deserted it even in the formative years. Mauli Chandra Sharma, Mookerji's successor, was the first of such deserters. Later, Balraj Madhok who had a real hand in conceiving the idea of the Jan Sangh and held positions of president, parliamentary party leader and ideological mentor left it in 1969. Madhok's successor, Pitambar Das, president in the 1970s, also left it to follow Charan Singh. Other stalwarts who left it included Vasant Rao Oak and Hardayal Devgun. These desertions took place within 25 years of its foundation.

After the formation of the Jan Sangh's successor, the BJP, those who left it include M.L. Sondhi and J.K. Jain. Moreover, the BJP had to face the resignations of Shanti Bhushan and Ram Jethmalani, both Union Ministers in 1977-79 and 1998-2000, respectively. The recent examples are Kalyan Singh in Uttar Pradesh and Shankarsinh Waghela in Gujarat. If these facts are sought to be obliterated by the RSS and its allied groups from public memory, it is only natural because it has always, falsely, claimed to be `the party with a difference'. Now, one of its major ideologues and a former general secretary, Govindacharya, has announced his separation from the BJP. There have been many more cases of desertions and indiscipline in the last decade which the party claims had resulted from its huge and rapid expansion in the same decade.

For the last three years, the Swadeshi Jagran Manch and the Bharatiya Mazdoor Sangh have strongly opposed the pro-globalisation policies of the NDA Government which has the BJP as its major constituent and leader. The founder of both these organisations is Dattopant Thengdi who was deputed by the RSS high command to create them. Mr. Thengdi, one of the most dedicated RSS pracharaks of old vintage, has never concealed his total opposition to these policies. But it is not only Mr. Thengdi.

A careful observer of the political developments would not fail to recall the unsolicited assurance proffered by L.K. Advani in 1992 in Davos and Washington that the two major parties in India, the then ruling Congress and the Opposition BJP, were in agreement on economic policies. These policies were those which the World Bank and the IMF were pushing during that decade as Structural Adjustment Programmes. In 1995, however, the BJP went back on that assurance to the World Economic Community and adopted swadeshi and self-reliance. It voted against the bill to amend the Indian Patent Act then and again in 1997. It adopted the same attitude on two occasions over the Insurance Regulatory Authority Bill which invited foreign investment in the insurance sector.

If the turnaround between 1992 and 1995-97 was a dramatic one, it was followed by a volte face later, after the BJP assumed its leading role in the Union Government. Both the measures which it had opposed twice were now owned by it as its own. These were enacted by Parliament with the active support of the Congress.

The NDA Government has been pursuing privatisation of the public sector; has been withdrawing the intervention of the state from several service sectors such as health and education; has, at the behest of the WTO or the MNCs, opened every single sector of the economy and social life to the induction of foreign capital. The agreement arrived at with the U.S. in December 1999 and with other western countries later to withdraw all quantitative restrictions from the bulk of imports has now been followed by commercialisation of water, a most basic necessity for the citizen. Subsidies on food for those below the poverty line have been reduced substantially; those on fertilizers have also been brought down.

Swadeshi, service of the poor masses, provision of water to every field and work to every hand; that is, all that the BJP had been promising the electorate throughout its existence has been given the go-by. The Government has made small-scale agriculture an even more unviable occupation. Its policies have led to closures of one-third of all small industries. Retrenchments, closures and lock-outs in medium industries have become common. Large-scale unemployment has resulted causing explosive social tensions. The labour laws are being amended to render our workforce captive for easy exploitation by foreign and indigenous capital.

Common RSS workers would have revolted. Some were silenced by the threat of discipline; others were offered inducements. Some, however, resisted. The Swadeshi Jagran Manch kept on pressuring the Government; yet, it failed utterly. But, it did not have the courage to fight openly. The BMS joined other national trade unions in big conclaves and pledged total participation in protest agitations. Yet, every time, it betrayed them. Appeals of fraternal loyalty and the enchanting mantra of Hindutva, came in handy. Moreover, would not an alternative Government, led or supported by the Congress, pursue the same anti-people policies?

Nevertheless, as general elections draw near, Sangh workers have to be enthused; the people have to be won over. A common strategy will be worked out to ensure victory. Small traders have got the VAT postponed. Minimum Support Price of some agricultural goods might be raised, nominally. More BMS affiliates will get Government favours. Besides, frenzied Hindutva remains a trump card to quieten dissent.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

Stories in this Section

Be firm

Implications of the trade figures

Sangh Parivar prevarications

Putting Pakistan first?