The absence of any dream scheme and the diminishing returns from Ayodhya have left the ruling party banking on the ‘Mulla-madrasa’ mantra.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi came out with a curious statement in an interview to a news channel, which he promptly posted on X after filing his nomination in Varanasi.
“The day I do Hindu-Musalman politics, I’ll be unworthy of public life. I resolve that I will not do such politics,” Modi said in the interview on May 14.
“I am shocked. Who told you that whenever one talks of people with more children, the inference is that they are Muslims? Why are you so unjust towards Muslims?” he asked, contending that having more children than a family could look after was a problem irrespective of religion.
Not only this, he said that in his childhood, his family celebrated Eid. Their Muslim neighbours would send them food, so no food would be cooked at their home on that day. “I grew up in that society,” Modi recounted nostalgically.
Was May 14 a Buddha-like enlightenment moment for Modi? Is he really a transformed person?
He was chief minister of Gujarat in 2002 when at least 1,000 people were killed in the riots, most of them Muslims, and a lakh were uprooted. Unofficial figures put the number of dead at 2,000. Modi had said he was sad, and would be sad even if a puppy came under the wheels of a car. Had he now changed?
However, the veil was blown off within a few hours and he was back to spreading the fear of Muslim reservation.
This has prompted a commentator to describe Narendra Modi as a ‘loner’ who alone decides the policy his party must follow, with no one else aware of what will he do next or in a position to seek an explanation from him.
Why then did he suddenly shift gear and claim his remarks on Muslims were “misinterpreted” by the media and his opponents? No one in the so-called mainstream media came forward to question the allegation of misinterpretation.
For the first time, Modi is fighting an election without the bulldozing effect of a sweeping campaign theme. In 2002, the polarisation linked to the Gujarat riots helped him sweep the polls. The lasting communal divide facilitated his victory in the state’s subsequent elections too. In 2014, he romped to power at the Centre on the crest of a ‘weak regime versus a can-do image’ with full corporate back-up.
But unlike in 2019, this time he encounters an election without the Balakot wave and the 56-inch imagery. The Ayodhya effect appears to be wearing off although every time the opposition raises the issue of job creation, the BJP counters by springing the fear of a ‘Babri lock’.
Going back to Modi’s brief climbdown on May 14, that appears to have more to do with the Election Commission notice on opposition complaints of violation of the model code of conduct with hate speech. Such a recorded explanation could help the poll panel to dispose of his case with a mild warning. BJP president J.P. Nadda has already responded to the commission on these lines.
For the first time, the Election Commission had, instead of serving the notice on the alleged violator, sent it to the party president. Several Opposition leaders had filed complaints against Modi.
At Banswara last month, he had said that if the Congress came to power, it would distribute the country’s wealth among ‘those who have more children’. ‘Population jihad’ has been an age-old argument by the RSS parivar that stokes religious hatred among the majority community. Modi himself was quoted using the words ‘ham paanch, hamare pachees (we are five, we have 25 children)’ in Gujarat to mock the Muslim population. Soon after his speech in Banswara, the prime minister’s economic advisory council came out with a report that gave credence to the idea of population jihad.
This thesis, however, was strongly contested by independent economists.
While the elaborate explanations in the interview on points raised by the opposition in complaints to the Election Commission should help it let him off lightly, the discomfort among many BJP allies might also have played on Modi’s mind. Chandrababu Naidu and Chirag Paswan have put on record their opposition to hate politics. Differing with the BJP, Naidu has said he would implement 4% reservation for Muslims if he won in Andhra Pradesh.
Paswan, who rejoined the NDA on the eve of this election, said there was no need for the BJP to spread hate against a religion. He would be worried about the impact on his Muslim supporters.
Also read: How the Election Commission Is Failing the Hate Speech Test
Shiromani Akali Dal, a traditional BJP ally that snapped ties, has warned Modi against outbursts against religious minorities.
A third reason could be that the prime minister had sought to make a course correction when the fall in the voting percentage suggested a change in voter mood. The Election Commission has run a special drive, especially among the new voters. After the first two rounds, it has been coming out with final polling percentage data to reassure the people that there was no voter fatigue. But the participation and crowd response at public rallies is also lukewarm, with the anti-Muslim appeals failing to evoke much of a response.
Another explanation has been that the mood change has forced the prime minister to adopt what political scientist Suhas Palshikar calls a dual approach, and address different constituencies differently.
His outreach programme last year was aimed at Muslim groups in certain pockets. Christians in Kerala and the northeast and Pasmanda Muslims in the north were targeted to win over support.
Whatever the reason, the paradox of playing the hard Hindutva card and also seeking minority support is beginning to hurt the prime minister. The contradictory postures will have an adverse effect, leaving Modi highly vulnerable to accusations.
Unlike in 2019, this time Modi is caught between conflicting pulls and pressures. Let us look at his campaign thrust during the past fortnight:
“If Samajwadi Party and Congress come to power, they will bulldoze the Ram temple and send Ram Lalla back to the tent. They should take ‘tuition’ from Adityanath on how to use the bulldozer at the right place,” Modi said. Adityanath’s bulldozer has mostly demolished properties of Muslims.
Modi said that the Congress would allocate 15% of the budget to Muslims if it wins. Responding to this, former finance minister Chidambaram said the prime minister’s ‘speech writers have lost their balance’
At Dhar, Modi said on May 6 that he wanted a mandate with 400 seats to ensure the Congress did not bring back Article 370 and put a ‘Babri lock’ on Ram temple.
However, in a TV interview later, he denied having said so.
Then again at a rally on May 16 at Zaidpur, he warned that if the INDIA bloc got a chance, they would bulldoze the Ram temple. And so it continues.
P. Raman is a veteran journalist.
