Vajpayee is no longer the odd man out

The BJP's (Bharatiya Janata Party) landslide victory in Gujarat has come days ahead of Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee's 78th birthday on December 25. The party, Chief Minister Narendra Modi and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad – all fought the elections in their own way. But all of them had a one-point agenda: to arouse hatred against Muslims who were painted as demons against the backdrop of hostility against Pakistan.

But Vajpayee does not have the image of being either anti- Muslim or anti-Pakistan. One can say that he does not stand by the Muslims. One can also say that he does not confront or curb the BJP those elements, which are inimical to the Muslims.

But one cannot say that he takes such steps as are harmful to the Muslims. In fact, his reputation is that of a 'soft-liner' who reportedly opposes the hard Hindutva stance of the Modi or the VHP's Pravin Tagodia type.

Again, Vajpayee is not considered a hawk when it comes to Pakistan. Even when he is hurt, he is not hostile. In Pakistan itself, his tenure as foreign minister in the Janata Party government (1977-79) is still remembered as the golden period in their relations with India.

The speech Vajpayee made at Lahore, after his bus journey to Pakistan some three years ago, moved the Pakistanis so much that tears rolled down many cheeks. They were touched when he said that Pakistan did not require anybody's certificate for its identity because it had delineated its own identity over the years. They still treasure his remarks in the Visitors' Book at Minar-e-Pakistan that India's prosperity and integrity was linked with Pakistan's prosperity and integrity.

Still the fact remains that Vajpayee did little when Modi, to dupe the voters, projected the line that the anti-Muslims feeling was no different from the anti-Pakistan feeling because of cross-border terrorism.

Why didn't Vajpayee, as the top man in the BJP, take any step to stop the campaign of vilification against Indian Muslims? In the same way, Vajpayee did not lift his finger when the Muslims were pilloried in the state or when the election campaign was reduced to Hindu versus Muslim. Is his stance of a liberal within the BJP only a convenient posture? Or is he just a mask for the RSS, as one of its ideologues, Govindacharya, had put it three years ago?

To dub him a communist will be misplaced. But not to criticise him for staying silent when he should be speaking out will be still more reprehensible. He looks like a person who knows too much but does not say anything lest the harm should be greater.

One thing is clear: Vajpayee does not assert himself. A person who has shown the knack of running the government comprising 24 political parties for five years can have his say. If he does not, the fault lies with him, not the circumstances. He could have stopped the communalisation of politics as well as the government. But he did not.

The best that can be said in his favour is that he at times mutters something which gives the impression that he is not happy with his party men. Even he distances himself at times to register his unhappiness. But he doesn't persist with those postures to show his annoyance.

Ultimately, he gives in.

Gujarat exemplifies his attitude. That he was displeased with Modi was clear. When he went to the riot-affected areas for the first time he was visibly upset. The rumours then were that Modi might be removed. True, the RSS moved in to protect Modi. But Vajpayee capitulated at Goa. Why couldn't he say that the party would have to choose between him and Modi? Apparently, something held him back.

Even during the electioneering in Gujarat, Vajpayee gave the impression of a person who had come to register his presence. "I am only an advocate," he said at a meeting.

But a two-thirds majority of Modi has changed his tone and tenor. He was present even at Modi's swearing-in ceremony at Gandhinagar. Should the country's prime minister be doing so, particularly when the government-appointed Nanavati Com-mission is examining the case of Modi's involvement in the Gujarat carnage?

Is success the only criterion? The fig leaf of his liberalism comes off when he hails the Taliban-like elements in the BJP in Gujarat. India is a pluralistic society. Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan, the Frontier Gandhi, and Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, like Jawaharlal Nehru and Sardar Patel sacrificed all to establish independent India as much for the Hindus as for the Muslims, Christians, Sikhs and Parsis.

Vajpayee is the prime minister today. There will be somebody else tomorrow. And as he himself said that there was nothing else for him to seek when he had already reached the top. It is the country that matters and not individuals or parties. Today when religion is sought to be mixed with politics and the state, he should have stood up and said: I would rather defend the country's diversity than accept the religious conformity.

True, Hindus are in a majority. But we have opted for a pluralistic society that provides sustenance to a democratic system. I recall Vajpayee's article, entitled 'BJP philosophy', where he said: "The Hindu society has been regenerated which was the task of the RSS."

Surely, Gujarat is not an example. He should realise that he is the prime minister of India and belongs to its people, whatever their religion. He does not do justice to the country or to his image when he tilts towards a particular community, however big it is in number.

Either Vajpayee has changed or I got him wrong. When Advani was riding the rath towards Ayodhya, Vajpayee came to England. I was then India's High Commissioner. I asked him how he had come to London at a time when the party was in the midst of the rath yatra (chariot procession).
His reply was that all those who were Ram bhakt (devotees of Ram) had gone to Ayodhya and those who were Desh bhakt (devotees of the nation) had come to London. I do not know if he still remembers it.

And yet, only a day after the demolition of the Babri masjid, he told me in reply to my repeated plea to him to leave the BJP, "Let the temple come up." Riding two horses at the same time can be an acrobatic feat. But it cannot be the way of governance. If you want to govern a country, you cannot run with the hare and hunt with the hounds.

The gift of gab that Vajpayee possesses has helped him to span the conflicting situations. He has even evaded straight replies. But he has to lead the nation when its very integrity is in danger.

Like some other people, I used to think that Vajpayee was the right man in the wrong party. At 78, he looks increasingly like the right man in the right party.

The writer is a former Indian High Commissioner to the UK and a Rajya Sabha MP.