NATIONAL POLITICS
In these days of the market economy, supply follows demand. There is much a heavy premium on the Muslim vote, that the market is cluttered with mofussil Netas, journalists, failed script writers, marginal film makers, scions of a faded Nawabi and peripheral maulanas besides innumerable sundry busy bodies, all of whom guarantee the Muslim vote to any formation that says it is in need of it Farooq Abdullah is credited with the idea that if elections are held in Kashmir on "his terms", in Mar ch, the Congress will be able to sweep the general elections in April.
Those not yet under a contractual obligation to any party, are willing to up the ante by insisting on namaz at the Babari Masjid site so that the burgeoning market can give them a look as well.
The other day a group claiming to be leaders from the Aligarh Muslim University arrived in the capital. They were treated with due deference by selected members of the union cabinet. Two days later, another delegation arrived claiming a greater hold on the "Muslim mind" than the ones feted earlier. The difficulty with the current scramble is that the Muslim vote is being looked upon as a huge, monolithic uncertainty.
That Muslims in West Bengal, Bihar, UP, Kerala, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Assam (and elsewhere in the country) all speak different languages and respond to different stimuli is lost sight of Muslims in UP, it is said, will vote en bloc for the former Chef Minister Mulayam Singh Yadav. How then does one explain a degree of goodwill that the much-maligned Kalpanath Rai has left behind among the Muslim weavers in his area of influence?
How does one explain why so many Muslim candidates (stand) on BSP tickets.
In West Bengal, the sizeable Muslim vote is said to be with the Left Front. This is largely true. But has anyone looked at the disenchantment among West Bengal's Muslims who believe that Saifuddin Chowdhury has not been accorded the respect he deserves in the CPM hierarchy?
These regional variations (and I can list them almost in every State) have to be taken into account while understanding the Muslim vote, but an analysis of the Muslim mind must take into account a host of other factors as well.
The attention span of the vote seekers is so small that any serious assessment of the Muslim predicament is simply not possible. In the absence of a serious appraisal, the tendency is to fall back on the lazy expedient of Muslim Ministers and the "Muslims" leaders. As far as the Congress is concerned even this tokenism is half- hearted.
When the Babari Masjid fell, the Muslim vote boiled from the Congress. One Muslim minister after another Muslim minister was accommodated in the Union Council of Ministers. Did the Congress really expect this tokenism to lure back the Muslims?
Let us consider the case of Salman Khurshid. He is civilized, cultured, suave, does us proud in every world forum where he represents us. it is commonly known that he is in that select group of four or five ministers who are not tainted by even a shadow of corruption, Yet, send him to Aligarh or any Muslim enclave for that matter, and he will be booed. Why should this be so?
That Salman Khurshid is associated with a government which, in the perception of the average Muslim, was a passive witness to the demolition of the Babari Masjid is a very small part of the reason why he is ineffective among Muslims.
The real reason is that, along with Jaffer Sharief, Ghulam Nabi Azad and others, he is seen as a "show- boy", a sort of decoration on the mantle piece, a devise to trick the Muslims into believing that the Congress was still secular when it has long ceased to demonstrate its secular credentials in tangible terms.
Why should this be the popular perception among Muslims?
Some months ago, a committee of Union ministers was formed to monitor the affairs in Jammu and Kashmir. In those days PM Sayeed was the Minister of State in the Ministry of Home Affairs. He was not taken on this committee.
From the Ministry of External Affairs, Salman. Khurshid was ignored as were Jaffer Sharief and Ghulam Nabi Azad.
Whatever the government's intentions, the impression that has percolated through to the informed levels of Muslim society is that the Government wished to play the Kashmir hand extremely close to its chest and that Muslim ministers had not been taken into confidence on this sensitive issue.
Little wonder then that Muslim Minsters in the Union Council of Minister are not the greatest "turn-on" as far as the Muslim vote is concerned.
(Source: The Pioneer, 10 December, 1995)
