NATIONAL POLITICS
RSS, BJP and VHP's Hindu Agenda Analyses by Amulya Ganguli
The BJP harbors MPs in its ranks who do not agree with the party line and are not scared of letting it be known. This suggests one of two thinks. One is that the MPs concerned are either particularly brave or that they are articulating a view that is secretly held in the party. In doing so, they are aware of deviating from the party's stated position on the issue but, at the same time, know that the deviation may be winked at since the possibility of a change in line is acknowledged within the organization and widely suspected outside.
The outsider, of course, cannot know which of the two interpretations is correct. So such episodes will tend to substantiate the belief that the BJP likes to speak in two voices - one for its hard-core supporters who favor an aggressive line in the propagation of its theory and the other for those who are still doubtful about the virtues of its Hindutva policy. The switching back and forth between L.K. Advani and Atal Behari Vajpayee is seemingly in keeping with this double-track approach. The BJP is currently operating in a somewhat low key, with the moderate Vajpayee as its prime ministerial candidate rather than the more hardline Advani since it apparently believes that the high note of the Ayodhya demolition was struck a bit earlier than was advisable.
However, this is clearly not the Vishwa Hindu Parishad's view. In fact, the recent observations of some of its leaders seem to suggest that the sangh parivar is not such a well-knit group after all. For instance, after becoming the new working president of the VHP last month, Ashok Singhal indicated that he considered the Shiv Sena's views to be closer to those of his organization than of the BJP. He pointed out that he still had hope in the BJP since it has a nationwide network" and had made "a beginning" on the Ramjanambhoomi issue when Kalyan Singh's government was in power in UP.
But he hinted that it was the Shiv Sena which was seemingly more ready to accept the VHP's "Hindu agenda" than the BJP. The Shiv Sena's only deficiency was that its base was limited. Not long afterwards, when the 40-point Hindu agenda was published, the VHP clarified that it would support any party which accepted it. There seems to be more in these pronouncements than the familiar double-talk intended to confuse its opponents.The RSS, too, had at one time seemed close enough to the Congress for Balasaheb Deoras to wonder why such a "hue and cry" was being raised about the Bofors deal when it was known that "all defense deals in the country involve kickbacks and commissions". This was when the BJP was part of an Opposition alliance. However, the BJP's parliamentary presence at the time was minimal and Balasaheb Deoras may be pardoned for thinking that there was a better chance of the Hindu agenda being implemented by the Congress than by the BJP.
Nor was this the first time that a member of the sangh parivar had expressed a clear preference for the Congress as opposed to the BJP. After the Congress had fared well in Jammu in the 1983 elections after a campaign waged on communal lines. K. R. Malkani, then the chief editor of Organizer, the sangh parivar's mouthpiece, wrote: "BJP candidates may have been defeated, but the BJP platform has won. Ideas are more BJP could at best sit in the Opposition and articulate important than seats. As the Hindus of Jammu saw it, the grievances. But the Congress could come to power and redress grievances".
It is clear then, that the RSS , the VHP and the BJP can all pursue policies which can separately advance their It is clear, then, that the RSS, the VHP and the BJP own distinctive causes. it is worth noting in this context that, in a recent TV interview, Vajpayee referred to his differences with the RSS on a number of issues. As long as there were no other Right-wing parties with some support, the RSS, notwithstanding the occasional soft word about the Congress, evidently expected the BJP to implement its mandate. The situation has now changed, but in a tantalizing manner in which any hasty step can spell disaster. The BJP, with its longer political experience, understands this. Hence, its "one step forward, two steps back" policy. The RSS probably also evidently the VHP. As a newcomer, it is impatient realizes that it must hasten slowly. The odd man out is evidently the VHP.As a newcomer, it is impatient.
The RSS set it up, of course, to serve a specific purpose (It) was expected to whip up religious fervour so that the BJP could gain. Undeniably, it did a good job in this respect (helped by Rajiv Gandhi's mistakes and the Congress' precipitous decline), but perhaps it was a bit too good For the VHP has now developed ambitions old fears about the tail wagging the dog.
The Shiv Sena's success in Maharashtra has also encouraged the VHP, for it is clearly more a party after witnessing, therefore, is the appearance of an extended its own heart than the circumspect BJP. What we may be sangh parivar. True, the parivar has not exactly been a closed entity. The BJP, for instance, has been quite indiscriminate in admitting members. The result has been its so-called Congressisation.
The VHP's Hindu agenda, however, represents an there are some in the parivar who not only consider the BJP to be not Rightist enough, but can speak about leaving the party or agitating against it or associating with more Right-wing organizations if the need arises.
The communist experience is instructive in this because some of its members thought it was not context. The undivided Communist Party split in 1964 revolutionary enough, and then the CPI(M) split in 1969 because the Naxalites wanted the party to move even further to the left. The end result has been the weakening of the Left movement in India. it is too early to say whether a similar fate will overtake the Rightists as well.
(Source: The Indian Express, 14 January, 1996)
