The Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee’s musings that emanated from the holiday resort in Goa have not caused many ripples though it has invited the ire of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad. He has tried to set on the correct course the definition of broad Hinduism. However, his attempts have not convinced many that there has been a change of heart. Only ten days earlier, he had praised the Gujarat Chief Minister, Narendra Modi and his unprecedented victory in the Gujarat Assembly polls. Surely as the Prime Minister of the country, he must be fully aware of the manner in which the mandate was wrought out of the Gujarat electorate. He was, perhaps, also aware that Narendra Modi as well as his immediate fans in the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and the Bajrang Dal had left no stone unturned in dividing Gujarat society between "Us" and "Them". His reaction to the Godhra incident—that every action had an equal reaction—had justified the violence against innocents who were virtually butchered in a merciless manner. The comment that justified the reaction was a clear divide between the two religions. One was set against the other without proving the guilt of or connivance of those killed in the Godhra train burning. Not only that, but Narendra Modi and his cronies had also gone far beyond human limits of civilised behaviour.

Any idea, any institution or any individual that dared to stand in the way of their steamroller was not only undermined but was also sought to be destroyed through vituperative and vicious campaigns. The BJP victory was not unprecedented. It was achieved in the most unprecedented manner. Yet, the Prime Minister not only ignored the snub delivered by the Gujarat Chief Minister, Narendra Modi, who walked away from the Prime Minister’s election meeting at Surat even before Vajpayee had spoken after telling the crowd that he would not be there for the Prime Minister’s address, but the Prime Minister also made an exception and presented himself at the swearing in ceremony in Ahmedabad. The definition of Hinduism and the concept of Hindutva practised by the chief minister and his close supporters were certainly different from what Vajpayee put out in his Musings. Since the Prime Minister has displayed a tendency to wilt under pressure and roll back his earlier correct stances in the past, there would be few who would accept his musings at face value. At the Shah Alam relief camp in Ahmedabad, he had castigated, though indirectly, the Chief Minister for his government’s failure to perform its State duty, Raj Dharma, of protecting the lives of many. Yet he wilted under pressure at the National Executive of the party at Panaji and gave in to the party hardliners who did not want the removal of the chief minister. On the contrary, they suggested that he should be allowed to seek a fresh mandate even as the fires of the communal carnage in Gujarat was still smouldering. Such an about turn over such a vital issue would not instil confidence in sane persons to accept the presentation of his thoughts from the holiday resort in Goa.

The predictable reactions came from leaders of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad. They condemned his Musings as reflecting "pseudo Hinduism." In another burst of anger, other senior leaders also criticised the Deputy Prime Minister, Lal Krishna Advani, for politicising the Ram Temple issue through his Rath Yatra in September-October 1990. They blamed his efforts as the cause for delay in construction of the temple because the BJP leadership had used the issue for getting into the seat of power at New Delhi. The VHP leaders and others from the Sangh Parivar are angry with both the leaders, not for the first time. They have begun to hit out against the Vajpayee government for some months now. It is a reflection of their frustration and not of their anger. It is a display of their disappointment at the fact that they were unable to drive the juggernaut of the Vajpayee government. They were frustrated at their inability to do effective backseat driving of the government with Vajpayee in the driver’s seat. The Sangh Parivar leadership had thought that it would be able to manage the back seat driving for the Vajpayee government and take the vehicle in the direction of their choice. But the amorphous and unwieldy edifice of the National Democratic Alliance created so many obstacles on the road that the Sangh leadership found backseat driving a difficult process. Hence, it decided to fall back on the Swadeshi concept, for it was much easier to connect the nationalism of its concept with the Swadeshi idea and effectively give effect to the much-desired expansion of its political base in the country. The Swadeshi concept was used to raise fears of foreign invasion. The Sangh chief said in so many words that the new economic policy that was initiated by the Rao government and vigorously pursued by the NDA government was an invitation for foreign economic invasion. The investors would first come as commercial travellers and would soon take political control after they demolished domestic enterprises through competition.

Thus, the foreign investors were first identified as "They." But it was not sufficient to motivate the lower rungs of society and galvanise them into the action that the Sangh Parivar desired. So the Christians were added to the list. But the minuscule section could not provoke the same fears in the majority community as a much larger community would. So the Sangh Parivar shifted to the terrorists. They were accused of implementing the will of Allah through their Jehad or so it was propagated. And the rest of the community was identified with "Them."

When Govindacharya had described Atal Behari Vajpayee as the mukhota (the mask) of the Sangh Parivar, he was not far from the truth though his remarks did raise heckles in the party. Vajpayee took such a dislike to Govindacharya that he was eased out of the party structure completely two years ago and was forced to go into self-imposed oblivion. But the State Assembly elections in the last five years proved beyond doubt that even the mukhota had become ineffective and was not winning votes for the party to enable it to continue occupying the seat of power. Yet another apprehension was nagging the Sangh Parivar that it might not be able to avail the services of Vajpayee in the Lok Sabha elections due to his failing health and his increasing age. There was a desperate need to replace the mukhota with something more effective and tangible so that the Sangh Parivar could rapidly expand its base by inculcating and inducting a larger mass behind its concept of nationalism. September 11 provided the opportunity to move rapidly. The attack on Parliament by terrorists provided the cause to intensify the campaign of pushing all those who raised their hands differently in prayer of the Almighty into a group of " Them."

Narendra Modi became an instrument for implementation of the new formula when the Godhra incident shook the nation. Who was behind the Godhra incident or how it happened is immaterial now. The fact remains that it became a god-sent opportunity for political exploitation and implementation of the new formula. Narendra Modi exploited it to the fullest extent. His main slogan was war against terrorism for it alone could provide security to the middle classes of the State. The communal divide was created to entrap the lower rungs of society. Their votes were essential for a clear mandate. Different wings of the Sangh Parivar systematically campaigned to generate a fear psychosis in their minds by claiming that only the BJP could save them from the inevitable attacks by terrorists. If the Congress won the mandate, they would be butchered by the enemy hidden close by, as the Sevaks in the Sabarmati Express were burnt alive. Mian Musharraf became the main enemy in the Gujarat polls. Sonia Gandhi was another target not only because of her Italian origin but also because she was a Christian. The Chief Election Commissioner, J. M. Lyngdoh’s decision not to hold early Assembly polls in Gujarat as the situation was not conducive, was twisted to highlight the bonds of Christianity between Lyngdoh and Sonia Gandhi. The attack on Akshardham in Gandhinagar, close to the residence of the Chief Minister, provided the final touch to the redrawing of the categories of "Them" and "Us".

The Congress strategists failed to read the ground reality because the Congress leadership was dazzled by the media prediction that there was no wave in favour of the BJP. The bigger mistake was that Sonia Gandhi was made to turn pseudo-Hindu so as to ward off the ill effects of the secularism that the Congress had practised all these decades. She was made to launch her campaign trail from a temple of Amba Devi. The Congress strategy left an impression that it was too timid a party to make a forceful bid to win the election or was too stuck to its old paradigms to tell people where it stood. Only now is the Congress trying to put on its old garb by pretending to be secular and blaming the communal politics adopted by the BJP as the cause of its defeat.

The Sangh Parivar believes that it would be possible to implement the same formula in other States as well for the nationalism of the Sangh concept has proved to be the right formula for Gujarat. The success of this formula has made the top leadership of the Bharatiya Janata Party, and especially Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee, redundant for the Sangh Parivar. In fact, both have to be made the targets for further expansion of the base for the Sangh-type nationalism in other parts. The Sangh Parivar has certainly come to the conclusion that it was no more possible to do backseat driving for the Vajpayee government. Both the top leaders of the BJP were in no position to steer the government in the direction that the Sangh Parivar desires. Hence, both have become the targets of criticism by the VHP leadership that has assumed the lead role in, and complete responsibility of converting India into a Hindu Rashtra in two years. The musings of Vajpayee in Goa can become a hindrance to these designs. Hence, he also needs to be paid in the same coin that he and his colleagues in the BJP had used against the Congress party in 1991, claiming that its secularism was pseudo-secularism intended only to win votes. Now the VHP is accusing the BJP leaders of perpetrating pseudo-Hinduism with the intention of winning votes and power.

Other parts of the country are not Gujarat, nor have they undergone the same traumatic experience that Gujarat underwent for months together. The BJP’s only advantage in the four States that go to polls this year is that they are States with bipolar politics where the Congress and the BJP confront each other. Other smaller parties and regional groups have no sway. The BJP has the advantage that the Congress has to overcome the anti-incumbency factor in three States while the BJP faces the same danger only in Himachal. Hence, other factors work on these elections and not the new-found formula of the Sangh Parivar. Till then, the Vajpayee government has a lease of life.