The passing of former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has cast the spotlight on two horrifying carnages in India, those in 1984 and 2002. Despite little similarity in the backdrop of the two pogroms, they need to be raised concurrently because the episodes were remorselessly coupled by leaders of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) for over two decades.
In the wake of Singh’s death, his emotionally-charged apology in the Rajya Sabha in August 2005, “not only to the Sikh community but the whole Indian nation” for the anti-Sikh progrom, was recalled by several commentators and those who worked with him, while paying tributes to the former premier. His family has put on record that this was one of Singh’s most difficult and poignant speeches.
Recollections of Singh’s categorical expression of regret also brought into sharp focus, continued efforts of the BJP leadership to not just refuse to seek pardon from people for the Gujarat pogrom of 2002, but also to justify their macabre silence by raking up the targeted killings of Sikhs and wanton destruction of their properties and belongings in November 1984.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi caricatured Singh on several occasions and even disgracefully parodied his name. He also effectively contended that his predecessor’s decision to “bow (his) head in shame” had not been as representative of the Congress party even though he sought forgiveness as the prime minister at the head of a government led by the party.
Also read: Why Modi Needed to Watch a Film
Despite Modi pillorying Singh, the latter had not just expressed regret but also called upon all “as a united nation, (to) find new pathways to ensure that our nation will never again go through such traumas, whether they are in Delhi or in Gujarat or in any other part of the country.” Unlike leaders of the Sangh Parivar, Singh never pursued divisive politics.
In contrast, Modi has undeniably and brazenly used the terrible happenings in 2002 as a tool to harness the latent majoritarian sentiment among a section of people.
It needs mentioning that in a TV interview when violence was still rampant, Modi made a startling statement:
Kriya-pratikriya ki chain chal rahi hai. Hum chahate hain ki na kriya ho aur na pratikriya… Godhra mein jo hua, jahan par chalees mahilaon aur bacchon ko zinda jala diya, iss-sey desh main aur videsh main sadma pahuchna swabhavik tha. (A chain of action and reaction is being witnessed now. We want neither any action, nor a reaction to it… the incident in Godhra in which forty women and children were burnt alive had to naturally evoke a shocking response in the country and abroad.)
Advertisement
We also ought to recall that in 2014 as the BJP’s prime ministerial candidate, Modi sidestepped a question on whether he would apologise for the 2002 riots in his Gujarat. On the Congress’ demand for an apology, he told a news channel, “Let them account for their own sins first.”
For over two decades, BJP leaders have perversely intertwined the two unpardonable acts of violence merely because the two tragedies were triggered by a single act of killing(s): violence against Sikhs in large parts of India was immediately preceded by the assassination of then premier, Indira Gandhi in 1984, while widespread rioting and ghastly incidents of mass killings in Gujarat were in reaction to the Godhra train massacre in February 2002.
In contrast to Modi’s repugnant vocabulary while bulldozing efforts to hold him accountable for the state government looking askance even while marauders impeccably (sic) went about their tasks, Singh’s speech made during the debate on the adjournment motion regarding Action Taken Report of the government on Nanavati Commission report, even till this day sounds like the words of someone genuinely pained at the chain of events.
Singh began his speech by specifying that speaking on such an occasion “meant a great emotional strain” for him. He accepted that while Indira Gandhi’s assassination “was a great national tragedy”, the subsequent sequence of events was “equally shameful.”
Significantly, Singh in 1984 held the job of the governor, Reserve Bank of India and had no role in managing internal security matters. Yet, speaking for a regime with which he was marginally connected, he accepted in 2005 that “there have been aberrations… I can only conclude by saying that all of us should ask forgiveness of those who have suffered in this tragedy.”
Robert O’Blake, deputy chief of mission at the American Embassy in New Delhi had hailed Singh’s public apology for the 1984 anti-Sikh riots in a diplomatic cable. In this message to Washington, he termed Singh’s address as a “singular act of political courage” and an “almost Gandhian moment of moral clarity in India’s long march to religious harmony.”
Importantly, Singh personally suffered in the tragedy that ripped apart lives and fortunes of thousands of Indians across the country: while he was in his official accommodation in (then) Bombay, his own house in Delhi came under attack from a mob which threatened to burn it down.
His recently-married eldest daughter and son-in-law, both academics in Delhi University were living in this house at that time. After news of Indira Gandhi’s assassination spread, Singh and his wife flew into town to pay their respects. Naturally, they stayed with their daughter even as violence was spreading through the city.
The mob had the information that the house was owned by a Sikh but the son-in-law sweet-talked them into believing that he had bought the house.
The incident however, had shaken up Singh who stayed on in New Delhi for some weeks. During those days, after it was safe for Sikhs to venture out, he and his wife regularly drove down to Lajpat Bhawan in South Delhi from where the spontaneously birthed Nagrik Ekta Manch (NEM) had begun running several relief camps across the city.
Also read: Manmohan Singh: A Man of Integrity Among the Unscrupulous
The two of them came and left inconspicuously until one day an important functionary of NEM struck up a conversation with the Singhs. Soon, he was asked his name and at this point he quietly introduced himself and unobtrusively walked away.
Modi does not have such ‘relief-camp moment’ in his life except during natural disasters like the Morbi Dam disaster. On the contrary in September 2002, while on his pre-election campaign, Gaurav Yatra, Modi had vented against relief-camps during a public meeting.
These relief camps were labeled by Modi as “baby producing factories” which were being shut down by the state government even when the people who fled to them, did not have the confidence of returning to their homes.
Singh concluded his August 2005 address by evoking the memory of Mahatma Gandhi. He referred to the peace apostle’s objective to wipe every tear from every eye of mortals. “That goal may be not attainable,” he started, “but that is the inspiration, which should inspire us in what we discuss and what we do in this august House.”
After what was witnessed in parliament during the Winter Session, these last words from that intervention of Singh is relevant for other situations too.
Nilanjan Mukhopadhyay is a journalist and author. His latest book is The Demolition, The Verdict and The Temple: The Definitive Book on the Ram Mandir Project. He also wrote Narendra Modi: The Man, The Times. His X handle is @NilanjanUdwin.
