Gujrat carnage in which the Narendra Modi Government itself was
involved has, much deeper implications for secularism as a state
ideology. Secularism was adopted by the Constitution makers despite
partition of the country on communal lines. Partition was followed by
widespread communal carnage on both sides of the communal divide and
despite \communal carnage secular convictions of our political
leaders were not shaken. However, the RSS and Jansangh and its
ideologues, partition or no partition, were never enthusiastic about
secularism. V.D.Savarkar, father of the Hindutva ideology himself
propounded theory of two rashtra (two nations) in 1938 Hindu
Mahasabha session much before Jinnah propounded it in 1940.

Despite severe opposition from the Sangh Parivar (though it was not
known by this name in those days) the Congress under the leadership
of Mahatma Gandhi, Jawaharlal Nehru and Maulana Azad adopted
secularism as the political philosophy for Indian state. It was a
great and courageous step, which proved to be cement for our unity
and integrity so far. Pakistan was broken into two in 1971 and the
concept of Islamic unity could not save it. However, India, despite
much greater diversity remained united thanks to our political
commitment to secularism.

The Sangh propaganda and partition of the country on communal basis
as well as our historical legacy since the British period, created
several problems for our commitment to secularism. Nehru had expected
that communal violence will be a past history and that independent
India will enjoy communal peace and political stability. He thought
partition was the final solution of the communal problem. However,
communal violence continued to erupt from time to time delivering
blow after blow to secular credentials of our state.

Gujrat carnage represents the peak of communal violence in
independent India. It was for the first time that state machinery was
directly involved and Chief minister Narendra Modi not only justified
it by saying it was natural reaction to the Godhra incident of
burning Sabarmati Express but also looked the other way when innocent
people were being killed most brutally and women were being raped.
Even in 1984 Sikh massacre state was not so directly involved though
it did have a role.

The Gujrat carnage has deeply shaken the whole nation and our civil
society, though its secular political space has been increasingly
shrinking, thanks to powerful propaganda machinery of the Sangh
Parivar, specially the RSS, reacted strongly to this carnage.
Writers, journalists, artists and poets are also now gradually rising
to the occasion and doing their bit to promote communal harmony.

The opposition parties like the Congress, the Communists (CPI and
CPM) and SP have also done their best in Parliament to oppose and
expose the communal forces belonging to the Sangh Parivar in
Parliament and outside. Of course all other parties have faltered
some time or the other in their commitment to secularism but both the
communist parties have been most consistent on the question of
secularism and communal harmony. The Congress has also been shaken
into some kind of awakening by the carnage in Gujrat. The Congress
has repeatedly faltered in its commitment to secularism, if not
notionally, functionally. Jawaharlal Nehru, among the Congress
leaders, was the most consistent in his commitment to secularism.
Mrs. Gandhi though appeared promising initially, but began to falter
after emergency and even turned to Hindutva in early eighties. She
also manipulated Sikh politics on communal lines in Punjab and
herself became its victim and was assassinated by her Sikh body guard.

Mr. Rajiv Gandhi had hardly any commitment to any thing. He was not
even brought up, like Mrs. Indira Gandhi, in secular ethos of Nehru
family. He hardly had much understanding of intricacies of Indian
politics. He encouraged both Hindu and Muslim fundamentalism to his
advantage but failed. He changed the Supreme Court judgement in the
Shah Bano case and passed the Muslim Women's (on Divorce) Act giving
blow to secularism and then threw open the doors of Babri Masjid for
Hindus to worship delivering another blow to secularism. He even went
to the extent of laying the foundation stone of Ramjanambhoomi Mandir
on the eve of general elections in 1989. He thus displeased Muslims
and lost their support and hence lost the elections. The Congress has
still not recovered from that blow.

The Congress thus lost all its secular credentials in the eyes of
people of India. It lost support of minorities and suffered debacle
after debacle in U.P, and some other states. The Gujrat carnage has
given the Congress also a great jolt and it is re-emphasising its
secular credentials. Mrs. Sonia Gandhi as the leader of opposition in
the Parliament fought effectively against the BJP-led NDA Government
on the issue of massacre of Muslims in Gujrat.

Mrs. Sonia Gandhi has at last realised that without giving effective
fight to communal forces and without de-communalising Indian polity
not only that the Congress cannot come to power again but Indian
unity and integrity will be seriously affected. She even talked about
raising a force to promote communal harmony but her concept about it
is not very clear. She only talked about taking care of riot victims
and sending women volunteers to the riots affected areas to take care
of the victims.

Fight against communalism is no easy job. The Sangh Parivar has
deeply communalised the Hindu middle classes and, as pointed out
above, the secular political space has shrunk considerably over a
period of time. The RSS Pracharaks work round the year with a sense
of mission and spread communal virus in the Indian society. The RSS
can today boast of thousands of such Pracharaks. They are
systematically trained for the job and are sustained economically by
the abundant funds RSS has at its command collected from Hindu
businessman every year.

The secular forces cannot boast of any such force. What Mrs. Sonia
Gandhi has announced has no such concept. The Congress Seva Dal once
set up with some such intention never worked with devotion or sense
of mission. At best it looked after the arrangements at the AICC
sessions. The Congress Seva Dal is no more an effective organisation.
The socialists also had once set up Rashtra Seva Dal. It too is a
historical entity now though symbolically it exists even now in parts
of Maharashtra. It is only the RSS, which works with as much
enthusiasm as it was set up with. Its enthusiasm and commitment to
its mission has not waned. It has instead increased over the years.

There is great need today to reflect deeply as to why the RSS has
been able to maintain its sense of commitment to politics of
religious hatred whereas all secular parties and organisations have
not been able to sustain their work even for few years. Does
religious fanaticism inspire more than secular ideals? It seems so.
But religious fanaticism brings great disaster to the country and to
the humanity and we have seen this everywhere, not only in Gujrat.

It is high time that the secular political parties should honestly
take stock of situation and take measures, which will save India from
further disaster like the one in Gujrat. The secular parties should
also realise that secularism should not be limited only to the
attempt to get minority votes. Then they would find themselves in
deeper morass. Unfortunately after Nehru secularism for political
parties, especially the Congress, became only an instrument for
minority votes. Its members, even at the best of time, were not
seriously committed to it. Thus instrumentalisation of secularism
exposed the Congress to the charge of "appeasement of minorities"
though the charge was itself politically motivated and the BJP wanted
to capture the attention of Hindu middle classes by levelling such
charges against the Congress.

The Congress could not even refute such ridiculous charge because it
was not seriously committed to secularism. Had it been so Babri
Masjid would not have been demolished with impunity under the
Congress rule. Narsimha Rao, the then Congress Prime Minister, thus
destroyed completely whatever was left of secularism in the Congress.
Thus the Congress party was completely alienated from all minorities
and lost the election that followed.

Though the Congress now has realised the ill effects of its less than
serious attitude towards secularism it is ot so easy for it to revive
the Nehruvian commitment to it. But there is hardly any other
alternative. The leaders of the Congress should take secularism more
seriously and not treat it as an instrument of power. Unity in
diversity cannot be maintained without it. "Unity in diversity" was
not merely a slogan for leaders like Gandhi, Nehru and Azad. It was a
political philosophy, the core of secularism. No society as diverse
as Indian society can survive without the cementing force of
secularism.

Secularism essentially means prioritising citizenship over religion.
Though Constitutionally citizenship has priority over religion, our
civil society, due to constant efforts to communalise it, is still
grappling with this problem. Our education system itself is deeply
infected with communal virus. Our text- books still demonise minority
religions like Christianity and Islam and project history through
communal angle. Thus secularising education system should be given
top priority.

We need secularism today for building a vibrant civil society and not
to win elections. The political parties should help build a new
political culture, which is based on tolerance and respect for human
values. Today our political culture is thoroughly infected with
casteism and communalism. Post-Gujrat we must urgently realise the
need for a new political culture secular and
humanistic.

**********************************
Centre for Study of Society and Secularism
9B, Himalaya Apts., 1st Floor,
6th Road, Santacruz (E),
Mumbai: 400 055.