New Delhi
It is over seven decades since India declared itself a Republic and promulgated its constitution.
The nation observes the anniversary on Jan 26 as the Republic Day every year with a grand military parade in Delhi and such ceremonial functions in state capitals and district headquarters.
Over the last few years generally there is a debate in the corridors of power and in pro-Left liberal media, especially the English medium, that the regime under Narendra Modi is indifferent to people's issues and agony as the Prime Minister wants to establish a dictatorial rule.
In some cases, the rise of 'Hindu nationalism' since 2014 has left Indian Muslims and Christians worried if not nervous.
The main apprehension among religious minority leaders has been that the BJP could change the constitution of India to discard its secular character and even do away with the parliamentary system.
The implied Presidential form of government is nothing new for the saffron party and one cannot find fault only with Modi or his compatriots such as Amit Shah and Yogi Adityanath.
In the 1990s, Modi's mentor L.K. Advani, a former deputy prime minister, had strongly floated the idea of a presidential form of government.
Even a commission was set up to review the country's constitution.
Of course, many critics say, the new Modi-led dispensation has been functioning more in a presidential form where Modi is the ultimate and only boss. Late Arun Jaitley, however, used to defend this saying, "In our government the last word is with the Prime Minister ''. Albeit, he wanted to castigate the Congress in the process as the previous Manmohan Singh government was virtually remote controlled by Congress president Sonia Gandhi.
But during seven-eight years there has been a raging debate over allegations that the centre was making subtle attempts to subvert constitutional bodies such as the poll panel and Supreme Court.
 |
| major display in 'Nagaland Page' : R-Day spl |
Lately there is a move to control the 'transfer/deputation' of the senior civil servants.
The government on Aug 5, 2019, abrogated Article 370 of the constitution that gave guaranteed 'autonomy' to Muslim-majority Jammu and Kashmir state.
In November 2019, the Supreme Court gave an order allowing the Ram temple construction in Ayodhya, a move that could not please Muslims.
Leaders of all major political parties including BJP and Congress now include temple visits and public prayers as routine political strategies. The evaluation of secularism is being done on a different perspective.
There have been a series of violent incidents against Muslims and Christians. One question everyone is asking - how long will India's secular constitution remain intact.
The Christian leaders say freedom of religion and expression to all Indian citizens are now in question.
Funding to many organisations have been checked. Mother Teresa-founded Mission of Charity also is facing scrutiny.
The RSS leaders openly accuse Christians of conversion menace.
So does it mean Indians are unhappy ? Does it also not imply that PM Modi's popularity graph should be affected?
But we have contrasting situations and true to the character of any democracy, this is a paradox.
Despite criticism of the BJP in English media and by political detractors, the Modi government returned to power in 2019 with an enhanced mandate.
In 2021 January, an independent media survey said nearly 72 percent of Indians are happy with the government of Modi.
In 2022, 'Morning Consult Political Intelligence', a US-based data intelligence company, reported that the Prime Minister's approval rating is the highest among world leaders.
His positive score was 71 percent - miles ahead of global leaders such as President Joe Biden and others.
Even the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) of 2020 January and farmers' stir in 2021 did not make any difference.
Now, it is for Uttar Pradesh to make a difference. Here too the issues being discussed are Hindutva and castes.
In the name of alternative there is Akhilesh Yadav, whose stint as Chief Minister between 2012 and 2017, is hardly remembered for any governance achievement.
Bose's biggest contribution was for religious unity, something Nehru failed
New Delhi
Jawahar Lal Nehru was a man in a hurry at times.
Such was an instance on October 16, 1952 when he hurriedly scribbled
that he was 'satisfied' that the reports of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose's death is 'correct'.
He also wrote - "The facts ascertained have been made public and Parliament has been informed...".
(see snap)
The 'death' of Bose has never been convincingly explained. No one is arguing that
Bose was immortal; but the mystery around his death remains an all time enigma of
our time.
The Khosla commission record also shows that the so-called eyewitness Dr Yoshimi had
contradicted himself on the timing of Bose's death.
Having said these, one may now debate here how one of the chief protagonists of India's freedom struggle actually was outsmarted by political machinations of some of his contemporaries.
It is unfortunate for the country that such a thing happened also because Nehru cultivated friendship and good rapport with Britons like Lord Mountbatten to Sir Stafford Cripps and offered himself at the political stage as a disciple of Mahatma Gandhi.
By 1937 different power games were on. Nehru made a disastrous refusal to induct only two members from the Muslim League in the government of Uttar Pradesh.
Bose, as President of Congress in 1938, began a fresh attempt to negotiate with Mohammed Ali
Jinnah for a settlement of the Hindu-Muslim question. But he soon discovered that Nehru was reluctant and had already complicated the negotiations.
Nehru allegedly used to dismiss the existence of the League. He said there were only two parties in India:
the British and the Congress!
Was this not a sign of arrogance from a paragon of virtues and democracy ?
Thus Nehru wanted the Congress to not only attain independence for India, he wanted
an independent country that is under single party domination of the Congress.
The ulterior electoral motive remained foremost even after independence. Despite Mahatma Gandhi's
suggestion, the Indian National Congress was never disbanded.
Looking "through the telescope” towards the Hindu-Muslim problem, Nehru is understood to have concluded
“if there was nothing, what can you see?”.
The partition of India and the rest is only history.
In early 1938, Nehru wrote: “I have examined this so-called communal
question through the telescope, and if there is nothing, what can you see?”
But this question which Nehru could not see was looked at rather differently by
Rabindranath Tagore. He wrote in one of his famous essays under the title “Bharat Varsh
ki Itihas” (Indian History): “Where there is genuine difference, it is only by expressing
and restraining that difference in its proper place that it is possible to fashion unity. Unity
cannot be achieved by issuing legal fiats that everybody is one".
Subhas Bose had attained unity of Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs, and Christians
is his Azad Hind Fauz (INA) movement.
The INA’s march to Delhi had commenced with a ceremonial parade on 26th
September, 1943, at the Tomb of the last Mughal Emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar in Burma.
Bose had also taken shelter of a couplet that meant - (So long as Ghazis’ are imbued with the spirit of faith,
the sword of Hindustan/India Hindustan will reach London’s throne).
Ideologically too Subhas Bose seemed to have been more pragmatic and looked for an
'active' mode of struggle as against the passive resistance policy.
Well, in his lifetime, Nehru benefited by his proximity to Gandhi and at a later stage
after his death left it for his daughter Indira, grand son Rajiv Gandhi and now upto Rahul
'exploit' those facets of Indian history.
Bose remains a romantic hero and was kept away from many official recognition.
No one has debated adequately why INA was never incorporated as part of the Indian
army after independence.
The 125 years of Bose's birth anniversary has concluded with the unveiling of a hologram of
Netaji at 'India Gate' in Delhi.
It is a date with the valiant chapter of Indian history for the historic 'India Gate'.
A man can be generous and benevolent but it's true the attendance in his funeral ultimately
depends on the weather. This has been precisely the spirit of how history is often guided.
Nehru has been dealt with kid gloves and glorified for reasons known and unknown. Time to unravel
more from the unwritten chapters of history.
ends
No comments:
Post a Comment