Modi's brazen take off

A walk through Jantar Mantar at stone's throw from Parliament may give a measure of India's restlessness. It's firmly etched in history after being host to many events, which later caused upheavals in India's polity. 

During one such walk, a booming woman's voice poured in torrent from a distance. A little closer, the verbal torrent turned coherent. A little more closer, victim of the verbal torrent appeared in sight. He was being led away by Renuka Choudhary, a minister in the Manmohan Singh led UPA government and a Congress spokesperson. 

The "victim" was in his 20s and later it emerged that he was a research scholar in JNU, New Delhi. And, he became a target of the verbal torrent released in seething anger by the woman, because he had asked a question during an open-air TV discussion, which was being recorded there.

"Your party supports division of Andhra Pradesh. Will your leader, Narendra Modi, support division of Gujrat, since your party favours smaller states," he had asked.

The answer apparently abruptly ended the TV discussion, but verbal torrent ensued. And Renuka Choudhary, apparently sensing that the young man could get in more trouble, forcibly led him away. Even significant moments after the man had been out of sight, the woman was still seething with anger.

Nirmala Sitharaman

About four months later, she was sworn in as Union Minister of State (Independent Charge) for Commerce. She is Nirmala Sitharaman. 

In the last two years, a lot of people started believing that the TV discussions in late evening shaped opinion of the people. Though this blogger does not watch any TV discussion, on and off one man had been seen with all the shrill in the most noisy news channel. He would shout down all voices against Narendra Modi and BJP.  He showed that his lung was better than that of intemperate anchor, who demands answer on behalf of the nation each night.

That man with most shrill voice is Piyush Goel. He, too, was sworn in as Union Minister of State for power in the Narendra Modi Cabinet. 

Though Modi declined taking son of Rajsthan chief minister Vasundhara Raje Scindia, Dushyant Singh, in his Cabinet on the ground that he would not have anything about dynasty, Goel is son of late Ved Prakash Goel, who was a minister in the Atal Bihari Vajpayee Cabinet. And, therefore, he is also a product of political dynasty.So, Modi not having anything about dynasty falls flats on close scrutiny.

The faces of BJP beat reporters would invariably turn dull at the sight of Prakash Javdekar. He would most sincerely defend Modi from opposition barbs. He would be too plain straight without any spin to elicit interest from reporters. He too became a minister with dual charge of Information and Broadcasting and Environment.

And, Ravishankar Prasad, as chairman of media cell of the BJP, would most sincerely defend Modi. He, too, is into Modi Cabinet.

Former Miss India contestant and India's most famous "saas and bahu", Smirti Irani had been on all news channels for the past one year to defend Modi dutifully. She surprised all with her Cabinet debut, that too as Union minister for Human Resources Development.

That she is not even a graduate has taken much of the print and air space should not cast aspersion on her ability, because even Tamil Nadu CM J Jayalalitha is just 10th pass. But unlike Jayalalitha been a political heir of the founder of AIADMK M G Ramachandran, we still do not know what Irani is in that sense. 

"She is very articulate in Hindi and English.." was all that Ravishankar Prasad fumbled when asked on the controversy. But India has millions of people who are very articulate in two languages.  

When former Union minister Jairam Ramesh threw his barb "Modi talking of

Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi

sanitation is like Asaram Bapu speaking about chastity", calls apparently came to BJP spokespersons to attack the irrepressible minister. Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi apparently ignored instructions from Gandhinagar. Making his case more worse, he red-flagged induction of JD (U) leader Sabir Ali in BJP with his "Dawood Ibrahim" tweet. He could not make into the Modi Cabinet.

A pattern emerges that all those who valiantly defended Modi in the media are now in his Cabinet. And that invites the criticism, that Modi yielded to favoritism and bias while picking his team.

That the Modi team is young and lean is all accepted, but ministers like Dharmendra Pradhan, who is an illiterate as far as the business of oil and gas is concerned, is looking after petroleum ministry tells the larger story of brazenness of Modi in picking his men.

Afterall, the decisive 2014 mandate is not at all for the inner circle of Modi. Rather, the mandate is for a stable and strong government. And, Modi has given opening hints that he had been quite exclusive in picking his team. That surely is not a good omen, as has been admitted by most die-hard admirers of Modi, who admit having been led down.

A close Modi watcher explained that Modi had been like this only, as he had picked the likes of Anandiben Patel, Saurabh Patel, etc., who were unknown in Gujrat till they became ministers after 2002. One of them is now chief minister of Gujrat. But India is not Gujrat and running a Central government requires working closely with states. However, Modi, arguably, is taking forward his Gujrat model in New Delhi literally.

Incidentally, Modi, who seeks to emulate India's most admired Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, has been far off in at least picking the men for various challenges. Vajpayee had B C Khandoori who heralded road connectivity. He had Pramod Mahajan who brought in telecom connectivity. Jaswant Singh steadied Indian ship through uncertain waters during the US sanctions against India after the nuclear test. Yashwant Sinha captained economy with aplomb.

Ironically, the RSS laboratory ignores history of medieval India most, while singularly remaining obsessed with ancient India, in shaping intellectual base of its products. Had it been otherwise, Modi would have known that the glory of Akbar had been due to his fine generals, who expanded his frontiers, and ministers, who perfected the statecraft. 

It's early days for Modi government and it will serve him well if he could find people who would be more than proponents of "Yes, Minister". India has enough of sycophancy. Another spell could break too many hearts.

A mighty slump

That pampered lots are supremely blessed with power to self-destruct is surely a hard truth of life. Such individuals leave stories largely unheard, but those in public life leave telling tales to be told and re-told. 

And Nitish Kumar, a Prime Ministerial candidate till not long ago, has been such a masterly phenomenon of political rise and fall, that Shakespeare might have found in him a tragedy king. Political commentators can not deny being in love with him even if he is being denounced for his masterly swing to casteism from being a development icon.

Incidentally, RJD chief Lalu Prasad was political mentor of Nitish Kumar during the march of Mandal politics, which swept through Gangetic belt in 1990s. When Lalu Prasad had to quit as chief minister of Bihar, after being charge-sheeted in fodder scam, he thrust his illiterate wife, Rabri Devi, onto the state. 

That act of political expediency may have extended Lalu Prasad's reign in Bihar for a few more years, but a whole generation grew up with a sense of inferiority complex thereafter. The Congress president Sonia Gandhi aped Lalu Prasad in 2004 to pick Manmohan Singh, who was not an illiterate but an economist of high repute. But another generation has grown up with gloom during the last 10 years.

Political scientists may need to invent a term to explain this art of political expediency of thrusting somebody for personal exigency. Because, it's spreading like a virus, which has infected Nitish Kumar now. 

Some extraordinary commentators could go to the extent of claiming the anointing of Jitan Ram Manjhi, a Mahadalit hailing from Most Backward Caste (MBC), as a political masterstroke of NItish Kumar to checkmate rise of BJP in Bihar. But that will be too shallow to last a few days in public discourse. 

Jitan Manjhi

Because, Bihar inherently has a restlessness, which may not be in other states, to turn people repugnant with the very idea of casteism imprisoning governance in the state. By the way, Manjhi's administrative skill was so well acknowledged by Nitish Kumar, that he could not find for him a better ministry than the SC&ST welfare.  

Incidentally, Nitish Kumar is not the only chief minister who faced an electoral rout in the 2014 Lok Sabha elections. He is in the company of Omar Abdullah and Akhilesh Yadav. But they have reacted differently to the verdict.

In fact, Omar Abdullah is seeking to undo mistakes of his government and tweeted his e-mail id to connect with the people to learn why was he punished in such a manner. Akhilesh Yadav is seeking to shrug off the shadow of his father Mulayam Singh Yadav and assert his leadership. 

But Nitish Kumar chose to relinquish the office, while "taking moral responsibility". His party chief Sharad Yadav has not yet resigned. Arguably, it can also not be ruled out that Nitish Kumar could not digest the idea of his arch-rival Narendra Modi becoming Prime Minister.

Arguably, the fall and rise in political career of Nitish Kumar and Kahkashan Parveen seem so overlapping to

Kahkashan Parveen

ignore. Parveen, a little known woman from Bhagalpur, first became a municipal corporator a few years ago and since then she has been rising and rising only.

Nitish Kumar first appointed her chairperson of Bihar Commission of Women and a few months earlier shocked most of his party men by sending her to Rajya Sabha. Politically Nitish sought to send the message that he was reaching out to Muslims. He denied Rajya Sabha nominations to party heavyweights Shivanand Tiwari, NK Singh and Sabir Ali.

Within JD (U), leaders and party workers saw Nitish in his full arrogance bloom during Rajya Sabha nomination episode. And, politics is sadly no hunting grounds for arrogant lots. That Nitish was handed over worst electoral defeat confirm him having lost touch with ground realities.

Was not Nitish Kumar hailed a development icon till a few years ago? Did he not win best chief minister awards at the hands of TV channels? Did not the media hail him for turning around a state, which had a long spell of dark age under his predecessors -- Rabri Devi and Lalu Prasad? Did not the Planning Commission of India certify Bihar of having achieved highest State GDP growth among all states?

Questions are too many and they should baffle political commentators. Because, Indian democracy in the last two decades has come to reward good governance. And answers of these questions will reveal the narrow world view of Nitish Kumar and his aloofness.

State of roads in states generally give a good measure of the administrative skills of chief ministers. In his first term, Nitish Kumar won accolades for building good quality roads. His models of monitoring on real time basis was also replicated in other states.

Incidentally, by the time Nitish went to people for another mandate in 2010, he even claimed that any one can reach any part of the state from Patna in a flat six hours.

But claims were highly exaggerated. Incidentally, this blogger, believing Nitish's words, could reach half the distance that chief minister had stated in 12 hours time a year ago. And the ride had been so bumpy, that one would need full two days of rest to recover from agony of road journey.

Public at large blame Nitish Kumar in the state for having destroyed education in schools by using teacher recruitment to further his political interests. Law and order situation improved and later nose-dived.

"Nitish did not take drive against criminals in  the state to its logical conclusion. The man who was credited to have put an end to lawlessness during Lalu-Rabri time soon lost favour with Nitish and was transferred to police training institute. Nitish is running a bureaucratic government where dissent is not heard," said Rajiv Ranjan Singh alias Lallan Singh during a conversation with this blogger two years ago. At that time Lallan Singh, after being the close confidante of Nitish Kumar, was also thrown out of the inner court of former Bihar chief minister.

And clear pitfall of a bureaucratic government is wide-spread corruption. So, greasing palms of all kinds of people in government jobs, from a beat constable to a clerk to higher ups, is the story of the second tenure of Nitish Kumar.

Surrounded by sycophants in Patna and encouraged by adulation of New Delhi media, Nitish Kumar apparently thought of himself as Navin Patnaik of Odisha, that there was no alternative to him in the state.

But his belief was utterly out of place. And he chose to self-destruct by snapping 17 years alliance with the BJP. That he did because he was convinced that weakening of the Congress meant revival of the idea of Third Front, and the BJP not being a pan-India party could at best get 180 Lok Sabha seats.

And, therefore, the JD (U) had supported Pranab Mukherjee in Presidential elections even while the BJP backed Purno Sangma. "After next year's elections, there will be instability at the Centre and, hence, we need someone like Pranab Mukherjee in Rashtrapati Bhavan," JD (U) chief Sharad Yadav had explained why his party was not going along with the BJP.

The 2014 verdict shattered all hopes of instability at the Centre. Nitish Kumar misjudged people's minds. And that he did, because he was disconnected. Incidentally, he's repeating his mistake, that of thinking that key to power in Bihar is through the caste arithmetic.

Those who do not learn from their mistakes are condemned as fools of worst orders. And Nitish should know that Indian politics has left behind arithmetic and is now flying with wings of hope.

To catch this ride he needs a mighty leap of faith, but he has chosen a mighty slump instead. 

Turning of the wheel of time

A decade back India's most admired politician Atal Bihari Vajpayee could not believe that the people had rejected him. That six years of "good works" could not impress people seemed beyond his comprehension.

In his moments of disbelief, his friend and colleague Sharad Yadav visited him one evening in 2004 just after the Lok Sabha elections. "Aap bhi haar gaye (you too lost)," Vajpayee sighed at the sight of the socialist. 

"Aapko to maaloom hai ham kis liye haare...(you know why we have lost)," gushed Yadav.

Vajpayee, with a sense of rejection, sat down to chat with his former Cabinet colleague. They concurred, that the NDA government would have retained power in 2004 had Gujrat chief minister Narendra Modi been punished for the post-Godhra riots in 2002.

"This country did not re-elect Vajpayee because he could not act against Modi. People forgot all the good works of Vajpayee and punished him for the (mis)deeds of Modi. Yeh desh Modi ko kabhi PM nahi bana sakta (this country can never make Modi a PM)," Yadav told this blogger last year, after his party, JD (U), had snapped 17 years long relations with the BJP.

Yadav has lost another elections from the same Madhepura Lok Sabha seat in Bihar.

In 2004 he had lost to RJD's Lalu Prasad. Now, he has lost to Rajesh Ranjan alias Pappu Yadav of the RJD. And, Madhepura where Yadavs consider themselves to be too intellectual to elect a muscleman has exactly done so.

But Vajpayee is no more in his senses to receive Yadav and ask him why he lost another elections. India's most admired politicians for many decades no more recognizes people and at the most he smiles at those who go to meet him.

However, if Vajpayee had been in his senses, he would have again been bewildered to see that India has elected Modi for Prime Ministerial job. That too with a number so stunning, that the whole Opposition may stay in shock for quite longer time.

And with his insight he would have known that his belief in 2004 of having lost re-elections due to post-Godhra riots and his inability to act against the "rogue" chief minister was so off the mark.

That the 2004 NDA defeat had much to do with arrogant "India shining" campaign and sheer arrogance of Pramod Mahajan were lost to majority of media, who were blinded by stereotyped campaign against Modi and now hopefully seeks to rediscover their sight, after the people have given their verdict. 

The wheel of time has turned.

Now, India's most demonized politician for a decade is all set to be sworn in as Prime Minister. He inspires so much of hatred in his rivals, that Congress president Sonia Gandhi and her son Rahul Gandhi do not consider proper to take his name on their lips. And true to the character of the Congress, other leaders of the party ape the mother-son duo to the hilt.

But India has moved much beyond the comprehension of Sonia Gandhi and her son. And by the time they would realize that India is no more a country of people seeking free rice and wheat, Modi would have delivered fatal blow to the very roots of the Congress.

An unemployed educated in Bhagalpur, Bihar.

Last two and a half decades of Indian democracy saw willy politicians  putting fetters of "secularism" to the people.

In the garb of protecting India's secularism, these willy politicians institutionalized dynasty in Indian politics. And to perpetuate their "secular" politics and safeguard dynasties, they took an ultra-Left turn for worse. 

The game-plan may have lasted a little longer if not for P V Narsimha Rao opening up India's windows to the world.

That Manmohan Singh was such a gifted Finance Minister under Rao and such a wasted Prime Minister under Sonia Gandhi should surely be a matter of another commentary, but he did help India see enormity of opportunities, which lied on the path of development.

In those frosty years of 1990s, India and its people had seen and read progress made by South-east Asian nations. And they rightly thought and aspired that India too could do much better than the smaller South-east Asian nations. 

Furthermore, Vajpayee gave wings to dreams of teeming millions of people. And then the A P J Abdul Kalam phenomenon happened. This dreamy man made Indians not only dream but even chase them.

And he made a lot of people believe that India would be a developed nation by 2020.

But Vajpayee was ousted, and, with the support of the Left, the Congress led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) came to power in 2004. The Left painted the UPA in deep red colour.

The dream of India becoming a developed nation by 2020 was thrown into a dust-bin and the country returned on the path traversed in 1980s.

If the Left was not enough, Sonia Gandhi packed her National Advisory Council (NAC) with ultra-Leftists and jhollawaalas who ran NGOs here and there.

And they believed that ensuring almost free rice and wheat to 75 per cent population of the country was the job for which there should be a government in New Delhi. 

A village in Itawa (UP)

A whole decade was lost. A generation soaked themselves in anguish at the lost opportunities.

The colleges graduated skilled professionals, who sought jobs to sell soaps.

Government stopped recruiting and corporate began laying off.

And India soon had an army of unemployed and under-employed and improperly employed mass of youth cursing each and every one on government and politics.

India had been such a paradox from 2004-14, that the posterity would ask, how could so many fools ruled the country at the same time. And the younger generation knew better than the most, that they could not afford to waste another decade chasing the discarded Russian ways of governance.

In Modi, India has seen a hope to redeem itself. And, he as a true politician had the measure of the pulse of the nation before any one else had. He knew that there is a lot of anger in India, which is aspirational. 

And, the "culprit" who cut short the innings of Vajpayee presented himself as the man who could empathize with anger of the nation and yet jacked up aspirations manifold. But he carried the track-record, which made the people believe each word that he uttered.

"A business house based out of Kolkata had applied online to Gujrat government for setting up a plant in the state," said a senior Samajwadi Party leader, who tried to drive home the point why Modi was connecting with the people.

A couple of days later, mobile phone of the businessman rang and to his hello, the man on the other side said, that he was Narendra Modi speaking. Still in shock, the businessman heard Modi asking him if he could come to Ahmedabad next day for a 2.30 PM appointment.

He readied a suitcase of files to make presentation and met the appointment. As he spread out his files on the table, with Modi sitting on the other side, Gujrat CM told him, that the papers could be put back in the suitcase. 

"This is a three-page MoU, which we have prepared, wherein we have mentioned what all support the state government would provide for your proposed plant. If there is anything missing, you can let us know," Modi told the businessman, who found that there was nothing missing. And the MoU was signed there and then.

"Now, tell me which chief minister in India works like that and if he is able to connect with the people, why should any one complaint," the SP leader told this blogger.

Arguably, 2014 verdict is a body blow to practitioners of politics of secularism in Gangetic plains of UP and Bihar. The only other state where this brand of politics could survive even after the Modi Tsunami is West Bengal.

That the mercurial wonder lady of Indian politics has survived Modi onslaught is true, but is surely not going to be her permanent feat. And she will have to face a much bigger push of developmental politics in 2016 state elections, which is written clearly on the wall. 

Some dreams never die.

The wheel of time has turned and has turned against all those who take people for a ride in the name of saving India's "secularism". 

And not only Vajpayee was wrong in diagnosing defeat of NDA in 2004 even his comrade L K Advani has been utterly out of sync with time.

You can't flog one man all years for one riot irrespective of the fact whether he was complicit or not. There has been 179 communal riots under the watch of Akhilesh Yadav in UP since 2012 and still this chief minister is "greatest custodian of secularism".  

Hypocrisy has an expiry date. And it lasts a little longer only in places, where people are hell-bent to commit suicide.

Autocrat, who?

Fortified people are mostly prone to script strategies, which end in self-goals. 

Uniqueness of 2014 Lok Sabha election campaign, running into over two months, is about too many self-goals by the Congress. And, if a self-goal is scored in the very beginning of a game, most likely players become panicky to run helter-skelter thereafter.

And first such self-goal came off in unleashing of a propaganda campaign by Congress to target Narendra Modi as an autocrat and dictator. That came off first from Union minister Jairam Ramesh, who is a key member of "war room" of the Congress and also in-charge of manifesto making committee.

Jairam Ramesh

Ramesh would tell to all ears tuned in to him, that "Modi is a Hitler and that Yashwant Sinha has told him, that he would not be part of Union Cabinet if Gujrat CM became PM". Some journalists fell for the propaganda, who would later say in hushed voices: "Boss, even Hitler ran a very successful campaign to rise to power in Germany."

Propaganda by its very nature impacts minds. And some of them last for decades and some for centuries.  

If not for successful British and American propaganda, history may have recorded Adolf Hitler as a warmonger, who was drunk on colonial envy, and as a megalomaniac and a racist. But the world knows him as a dictator and autocrat. 

Incidentally, dictators seek to prolong their rules even at the cost of national interests. They do not gamble with wars, which could eclipse them. And, Hitler was clearly a gambler, who used people as pawn to play the war game of chess with the British and French colonial powers.  

Arguably, Modi's comparison and even an attempt to bracket him with Hitler should have been dismissed by matured minds as deeds of idiots of the worst order. But, hold and behold, this outrageous propaganda was latched on by the Congress leaders with electric speed. And that laid bare the bankruptcy of ideas in the "war room" of the Congress.

Incidentally, world history has seen most autocrats in the African continent. That clearly reveals a linkage between extreme poverty and authoritarian rule. Some came up in West Asia where power flows from the oil wells. And China is a story of an institutionalized one party rule, which sprang up also because of excessive poverty in the rural areas.

But India does not fit into any of the above mentioned pattern to produce autocrats. Indian culture is too strong a bulwark to allow any such autocrats to gain foothold in the highly fertile lands nourished by so many rivers, that poverty of the kind seen in Africa could be here. That gives an ideological framework to India, which, incidentally, is the most vibrant democracy in the world.

Authoritarian and authoritative are words with contrasting meanings. And Indian political system did produce leaders who were or are authoritative in nature. Two contemporary examples will suffice to explain the subject.

First is that the BSP chief Mayawati. The last press conference of Mayawati was held in her majestic bungalow in New Delhi. Before she came into the conference hall, two men in blue blazers roamed around to see all arrangements were perfect. They were Satish Chandra Mishra and Dara Singh Chouhan (leader of the party in Lok Sabha). 

Mishra would tell camera persons of TV channels to remove the wires attached to loud-speakers, because "Behen ji's sandle could get stuck in". Chouhan also did similar things. While Mayawati spoke for an hour, these two men stood besides reporters as guards. That's the style of functioning of Mayawati, which one can term as that of an authoritative leader.

Second is that of Mamata Banerjee, the mercurial and gutsy leader, who ended 34 long years of Left rule in West Bengal. When Parliament is in session, she is glued to TV channels to keep a watch on performances of her MPs in Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha.

Bhartruhari Mahatab

While Lok Sabha was discussing Lokpal Bill, Banerjee was glued to TV channels in her office

in Kolkata. Her party was supporting Lokpal Bill. Then she heard Bhartruhari Mahatab, a learned MP of Biju Janata Dal (BJD), punching holes in the Lokpal Bill by highlighting the adverse impact on federal structure. She found merits in his arguments. 

And, so, she rang up Ratan Mukherjee, her pointsman, to connect her to Kalyan Banerjee. But he could not do so, as Lok Sabha was in session and thus the message was not passed, that there was a change of heart in Kolkata. And to her dismay, Kalyan Banerjee passionately Lokpal Bill. But in the evening all hell broke against Kalyan Banerjee. 

The next day when Lokpal Bill was taken up in Rajya Sabha, Ms Banerjee's command was followed by her MPs, who most viciously opposed the legislative proposal. 

Interestingly, Ratan Mukherjee (Ratan Da for Bengali reporters), who had been man-friday of Mamata for over a decade, could not survive mood swings of his leader and is now virtually out of the power equation and staying in New Delhi.  

The first one has never won elections in Uttar Pradesh in succession and the second is struggling to keep her popularity intact just after three years of historic win in West Bengal.

But Modi has won three elections in succession. And, majority of the six crore Gujrati voters are quite educated and well off to elect an "autocrat" for the past 15 years. 

Autocrats can not be popular. Popularity inherently demands appeal among the followers. And people in democracy punishes arrogant politicians with quite ease. That also explains why Nitish Kumar even after delivering reasonably well for first six years of his rule in Bihar seems to have lost the favour of the people in the state. But Modi by all accounts remain a popular leader of Gujrat even after 15 years at the helm of the affairs. 

Flag-bearer of BJP at Buxar

Indians, who take fluency in English for their status symbol, also happens to be most abusive when it comes to usages of words. And, we use terms like "dictator", "Hitler", "autocrat" in a manner as if none other than us know English. 

The 2014 election campaign is seemingly turning out to be the most engaging electoral exercise in India's democratic history. And there will surely be lessons for all of us, besides the Congress and its fortified strategists.  

Gandhian folly to herd

History has keys to many riddles of modern times. 

But history bores most, as it has mostly been written by red-clothed men, who owe their intellectual sharpness to propaganda publications shipped from Russia and dumped in various varsities of India.

Most haunting riddle of contemporary India is its over 16 per cent population holding on to the belief that their "religion is in danger".  This danger seems perennial.

And as curtain comes down in another one week over long drawn out election campaign to elect members of the 16th Lok Sabha, there is no denying the fact that Muslims have been used as canon fireballs against BJP's PM candidate Narendra Modi. Nonetheless, a tiny lot among the Muslims have bolted and become Modi supporter; but they are too few to matter at all.

Muslim boys playing cricket in Bhagalpur (Bihar)

The Likes of Mamata Banerjee, Mulayam Singh Yadav, Mayawati, Rahul Gandhi  and his mother Sonia Gandhi among others have tried their best to make Muslims believe that Modi would "butcher" them if he were to come to power in New Delhi. That the seemingly "massacres of Muslims will be all around" campaign slogan of non-BJP political parties surely seeks to milk "religion in danger" psyche of the minority community. 

Long into the past, it was a local battle fought and lost by Muslim Nawab of Bengal , Siraj-ud-Daulla, on June 23, 1757 at Plassey, that seeded, arguably, for the first time, "religion in danger" psyche in Muslim minds. Incidentally, Mamata Banerjee finds Mir Jafar literally on her tongue if she has to bash any political dissidence within his Trinamool Congress.       

One hundred and sixty two years later, "religion in danger" was institutionalized in Indian political discourse. And, it was none other than Mohan Das Karam Chand Gandhi, later Mahatma Gandhi, after he became an icon of India's freedom struggle, who made it happen. 

In his eagerness to win over Muslims to freedom struggle movement at a time when Sir Sayyed Ahmed had indoctrinated minority community to become pro-British to help them get government jobs, Gandhi gambled to mix religion and politics to spearhead Khilafat movement (1919-1924) for a cause, which had nothing to do with India and even Turkish Muslims thought otherwise. 

The movement flopped and Gandhi proved himself to be a political novice. Even though the red-clothed historians would see only virtue in that failed experiment, India paid heavy price in just 23 years time, as  Britain ran its surgical knife to dismember the country. What the Greats like Ashoka, Chandragupta Mourya and Akbar had passed on as legacy was squandered off by the deeds and misdeeds of awfully slow freedom movement of India and incompetence of those leading it.   

Ironically, Gandhi may not have seen far into the future to know that a few years later Pakistani Army and numerous militant organizations groomed by Rawalpindi would wreak havoc with their "religion in danger" weapon by allowing and executing massacres of people on a scale never seen in the world history. Gandhi may have just lit a flame, but Muhammed Ali Jinnah first and Gen. Zial-ul-Haque later turned that into a raging fire.

Jinnah with Gandhi

It's important to slip into history for a while, because contemporary politicians seem an ignorant lot.  By keeping alive apprehensions of riots, Muslims in India have been herded, first by Jinnah and later by all and sundry. In the 2014 Lok Sabha election campaign, it has been made like that Narendra Modi is a "rioter par excellence". 

A year back, journalist and playwright, Tehseen Munawer, wrote an open letter to Uttar Pradesh chief minister, Akhilesh Yadav, asking if he could take his kids to his ancestral village on Eid. That he had to write the letter had to do with over 50 communal riots having taken place in Central and eastern UP by them. But that was much before the ever peaceful western UP where Jats and Muslims shared quite symbiotic relations too became hunting ground for blood thirsty men.  

And with so many riots in the past two years under the watch of a "secular" government in Lucknow, mood of Muslims was worthwhile to explore. So, off the Agra-Firozabad highway, Haji Jallo Aloowaale, 75., had a lot to share. 

He claimed that he had been voting for Mulayam Singh Yadav (SP) since 1984. "Mulayam ko vote karna Allah ki marzi hai (it's Allah's will that we vote for Mulayam)," said Haji Jallo. But the same Mulayam allowed quite a few riots to take place in UP, did not he?  To this he said: "Mulayam ne Masjid girne nahi dee (Mulyam ensured that the mosque was not demolished)," said Jallo.

Haji Jallo

When asked about who will the Muslims here vote for, Jallo stopped a few young people, including burqa clad women, and demanded to know, whom they would vote for. With one hand resting on the waist and a young burqa clad woman for the company, a young man said "BSP". "Get out, you scoundrels," screamed Jallo, and the young men and women made a hasty retreat, with glare in their eyes.

With contradictions on display, it was prudent to check with others and Ajgar Hussain Quraisi, 45, seemed quite eager to talk. "We will vote for Mulayam, but young Muslims seem tilting toward BSP. The older generation among Muslims are sticking with Mulayam," said Quraisi.

When Modi's name is dropped, it becomes quite evident that Muslims are extra careful this elections not to allow the BJP run away with most number of seats in UP. "Gardan kata sakte haen par Modi ko vote nahi de sakte (We can lose our lives, but can't vote for Modi," said Muhammed Momeen in Agra. 

There are also a few Muslims who are opting for BSP, because of their unhappiness with the Samajwadi Party government in Lucknow. "We do not get any benefits: no jobs under MGNREGA, no elderly pension, no health care. We will vote for BSP in this elections," said Dilawar Khan, 35, in Konchhi village in Mainpuri (UP).

Dilawar Khan in Mainpuri (UP)

 A few conversations here and there gave a clear picture that the Muslims are identifying strong candidates against BJP across UP. "In Agra, we will vote for BSP; but in Firozabad our votes will go for SP," said Akbar Khan, 40. In Mathura, Muhammed Saleem, 45, said that Muslims would largely be voting for RLD (Jayant Choudhary against Hema Malini). 

Incidentally, UP, Bihar, West Bengal and Assam are states where "religion in danger" plank has helped political parties to herd Muslims for many decades. Shahid Siddiqui, a former member of Rajya Sabha and editor of Urdu weekly Nai Duniya, came openly in favour of Modi, and argues against "herd" behaviour of Muslims in elections. 

"My timeline on Twitter is flooded with abuses, but I don't care. If Muslims want to progress, they will have to come out of this herd mindset. If they start voting for the BJP, cadre of the party will also accordingly change their beliefs and outlook about Muslims," said Siddiqui.    

 

Ram Sewak Yadav, 55, a keen political observer in Etah (UP), noted that Muslims are in a position to stop BJP in at least 40 Lok Sabha seats. But, he adds, a sharper polarization of non-Muslims and non-Yadavs in favour of the BJP would nullify all tactical advantage that the minority community had been enjoying in previous elections. And that appears to have happened in UP and also taking place in Bihar and Assam, with a beginning in West Bengal as well. 

Clearly, Muslims, egged on by a host of political parties, appear to be on front-line of the cross-fire against Modi. And, that suits Modi well, as is noted by Nirendra Dev, whose book "Modi to Moditva: An uncensored truth" was first to hit the stand among a few more . "After the post-Godhra riots, Modi during campaign for Assembly elections told me that the more he was bashed being anti-Muslims the more he got stronger; and he does not feel the need to counter that image as projected by his rivals," Dev notes.   

India surely awaits Muslims to bolt. It's animals who herd, not humans. And two hundred and fifty seven years are awfully long time to take a leap of faith.