Lines of History and myth blur in Indian politics

Delhi state Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal is good at baiting his favourite enemy, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and his party, the BJP [Bharatiya Janata Party].

On Friday, Kejriwal unveiled portraits of 70 great Indian personalities including India’s freedom fighters, revolutionaries and heroes; the portraits would go up in the Delhi legislature gallery. The Mysore king of the 18th century, Tipu Sultan, was among the portraits unveiled.

In his speech on the occasion, Kejriwal came hard on the “atmosphere of violence” disrupting normal life in the country. He was indirectly blaming the prime minister for his “divisive politics.”

Apart from bovine and Dalit politics, Kejriwal would have had in his mind the recent riots by the violent right-wing Hindu elements of the Karni Sena, a party of sorts founded in 2006 in Jaipur to protect the interests of the Karni community.

Recently the Karni Sena had been in the news for their protests against the release of the movie Padmaavat, a 13th century Rajasthan queen of exceptional beauty and valour, but little historicity.

It’s in this context that Kejriwal unveiled the portrait of Tipu Sultan who, to many right-wing Hindu fundamentalists — and their numbers are now legion — is a demonic character. Demonic — as their perception of the Mysore king is not always founded on facts.

The Hindu fundamentalists in general believe that Tipu (1750-1799), who, in his rather short life waged three of the four Anglo-Mysore wars in the last three decades of 18th century is a secular man rather kindly disposed to the Hindus.

Of the four wars, the second had ended in a treaty. The third and fourth were pyrrhic for Tipu as his former allies, the Marathas and the Nizam, had switched loyalty and joined forces with the British.

And the Nizam and his administration, it might be noted, was largely Islamic. That Tipu turned against the Nizam and that the Nizam favoured the British at a critical juncture itself shows as often as not politics is defined by compulsions of survival rather than religious or other values. Tipu took four or five bullets in the fourth and final war, and died in the battle field.

So the question — and this comes up every once in a while — that has been troubling the Indian politicians has been whether Tipu was a patriot or not. One school of thought says because Tipu fought against the British, he was actually a freedom fighter. The Hindutva school believes as a Muslim ruler, Tipu persecuted Hindus.

He did put to rout the Zamorin ( Raja) of Malabar, for instance, because the Raja was with the British at crucial periods in Tipu’s war-torn life. But it’s also a recorded fact that Tipu took care of those who were loyal to him no matter what their faith.

Just now though the question is not who or what Tipu was. But how a long-dead man is polarising national politics. Recently there have been several controversies revolving round Tipu, germinating, predictably, from his home land, Mysore and then spreading outwards to Delhi.

Tipu would have had no idea that one day he would be staring down from the walls of the Delhi legislature at a bunch of politicians who are using him for their end. Certainly, given his character, he would have resented that his status has come down from that of a king to a pawn.

Retaliatory move

And so Kejriwal has found an ally in an unsuspecting corpse; and the BJP does not like it. Kejriwal knows it. Not that the BJP has any qualms displaying their dislike for him.

In December, when Narendra Modi inaugurated a new metro line from Delhi to Noida (a part of National Capital Region, though geographically belonging to the neighbouring state of Uttar Pradesh), just about every one from every party was called except Kejriwal.

This is despite the fact that the DMRC (Delhi Metro Rail Corporation) is equally partnered by both the Centre and the Delhi government. Kejriwal’s new found love for Tipu clearly is in retaliation.

It’s an increasing trend in Indian politics that history is being politicised to suit the interests of political parties.This is not just dangerous because facts and fiction blur, and history comes out often as mythology. It is also dangerous because this is a rather a time of “sentiments” for India. And it’s best we see most of them in tacky TV serials, not in real life. Indeed, it’s best to leave the famous dead alone. They come alive in ways which are injurious to health.

C.P. Surendran is a journalist based in India.