Back to Nuclear Politics Page
From Ayodhya to Pokhran ; Ram Mandir to Shakti Peeth ; Jai Shri Ram
to Bam Bolo. The BJP/RSS has yet again changed gear - this time, from
religious fanaticism to (almost) 'secular' jingoism.
At one level, the change is mere cosmetic rather than substantive and
does not signify any fundamental shift. Both are essentially attuned
to the task of generation, accentuation and systematic spread of
insecurity, paranoia, hatred and aggression. Both are meant to stir
primordial and bestial passions up from the darkest recesses at the
bottom of human hearts directed against the (carefully constructed)
'other'.
At another, the two are separated not only by passage of time but
also by a significant shift in the underlying balance of power, which
has taken place in the intervening period. While Jai Shri Ram was the
war cry of the emergent (Hindutwavadi) fascism (in opposition), with
limited (though not insubstantial) access to the levers of state power
; Bam Bolo is an extremely important milestone in the evolving and
unfolding action plan to reset the 'national agenda' by a central
government already installed in power, headed by these fascist forces.
Here, it bears recalling that the central agenda of the BJP/RSS
(i.e. the Sangh Parivar) is the establishment of a Hindu Rashtra
(i.e. a "Hindu" nation state) and this calls for outright negation of
the Indian nation state (and its ideological basis) which came into
being through the process and as the culmination of India's struggle
for independence from the British colonial rule. The 'idea of India'
which emerged and evolved over the last 150 years or so during the
course of this epic struggle ( and also in its aftermath )
essentially recognises the legitimacy of the multi-ethnic,
multi-lingual, multi-religious and multi-cultural character of the
Indian society and consequently pluralist secular (corporatist)
democracy as the only viable basis for the independent Indian
state. The project of Hindu Rashtra, on the other hand, calls for
mobilising the otherwise amorphous and heterogeneous Hindus by
(re)defining , (re)constructing and (partially) homogenising them
involving an intricate and elaborate process of identity building
mainly through the mechanism of "stigmatisation and emulation" of the
"evil, threatening and alien other", which is again ceaselessly being
constructed and reconstructed. While religion is put to extensive and
intensive instrumentalist use in the task of militant, exclusionist,
majoritarian mobilisation, elements of (ultra)nationalism are also
put to good use by borrowing and (mis)appropriating the idioms and
icons of (widely accepted) mainstream (secular) nationalism,
particularly (though not exclusively) of its rightwing variety.
If (at least partial) adoption of 'soft Hinduism' by successive
Congress governments at the centre, roughly since the mid-seventies,
(against the backdrop of a generalised rightward shift in the
(national) political mood caused by the sum total of actual outcome of
a 'welfarist' state driven capitalist economic development in the
post-independence (parliamentary) democratic India and a worldwide
decline of radicalism in the post-Vietnam War era) prepared the ground
for the successful emergence of hard Hindutva (i.e. rabid Hindu
communalism labeled as 'cultural nationalism'), then the gradual
supplanting of the call for "unity in diversity" by the injunction to
"join the national mainstream" on the part of the (then) mainstream
establishment made the frenzied cry of "one nation, one people, one
culture" (or "Hindi, Hindu, Hindustan") sound less and less strange
and alien.
The Pokhran blast carried out 14 years back, on the 18th of May,
1974, notwithstanding the officially proclaimed peaceful intentions,
constituted the first visible turning point in independent India's
policy of spirited championing of international peace, disarmament and
creation of a nuclear weapon free world. The United Front headed
government of India's refusal to sign the Comprehensive Test Ban
Treaty (CTBT) as drafted by the Conference on Disarmament (CD)
headquartered at Geneva, which was meant to impose blanket ban on all
(except for sub-critical ) nuclear explosions constituted the second
turning point. This time the turn was even more radical, not just
because the refusal was justified by unjustly equating the (virtually)
non-discriminatory CTBT with the grossly discriminatory NPT
(Non-Proliferation Treaty), which allowed the five acknowledged
members of a permanent and exclusive nuclear club to uninhibitedly
expand their nuclear arsenals, while disallowing all other states of
the world, designated as nuclear have-nots, any such aberration. But
because, for the first time, India's national security concern was
cited as one of the principal reasons for not signing the treaty,
thereby implying that the nuclear weapons, meant to cause
indiscriminate mass destruction with long lasting traumatic effect on
all life forms, are legitimate means to effectively ensure (India's)
national security. This constituted a total reversal of India's
official security doctrine being followed till then.
It can be quite justifiably argued that as the opening of the lock of
Babri Masjid paved the way for its eventual demolition, similarly
Pokhran '74 and CTBT '96 prepared the ground for the test explosions
carried out on the 11th and 13th of May, 1998 for demonstratively
military purposes. It would, however, be a criminal folly to ignore
that as in case of 'lock opening' to 'demolition', 'Pokhran '74' to
'Pokhran '98' as well constitutes a qualitative (just not
quantitative) leap conveying portends of imminent doom and thereby
calling for the most determined and concerted actions on the part of
those who are committed to defend and deepen 'democracy' in India.
Here, it needs to be reiterated that the very existence of India will
be in serious jeopardy in case 'democracy' does not survive.
In order to work out a set of appropriate and effective responses to
this latest development, arguably of momentous import, it is required
to examine the validity of the rationale being put forward in support
of these blasts, identify the actual source(s) of inspiration, explore
the real motivations and comprehend/anticipate the range of future
possibilities.
As regards the claim that the blasts are meant to counter the
heightened threats to India's security from China and Pakistan and
actually have helped India to emerge far more 'powerful' and 'secure',
this is evidently false. As has been pointed out in the editorial of
The Economic Times (15.05.98), "[t]his is an illusion. India's
strategic position [in the aftermath of the blasts] has not improved,
and may just have deteriorated." The editorial has also rightly
pointed out that a nuclear war is unwinnable as it assures mutual
destruction. What, however, needs to be further clarified that a
nuclear weapon, quite contrary to popular perceptions, is very much
unusable as well. Nothing illustrates the point better than the
well-demonstrated inability of the American war machinery to use the
dreaded 'bomb' even while suffering a long drawn out, humiliating and
bloody defeat in Vietnam. Incidentally the 'bomb' could not be used
against the recalcitrant Iraq (or for that matter Libya, Cuba, North
Korea or Iran either). The fact that the mighty USSR, the owner of
second largest nuclear (and conventional) arsenal had to suffer
disintegration at the beginning of the present decade should be enough
to blow up the myth that the 'bomb' accords greater security, if not
to the 'people', at least to the 'state'. What is, however, most
interesting to note that in the aftermath of the blasts, instead of
emerging 'more powerful', with more and more countries rallying behind
India, it stands very much isolated in the international arena. Even
non-nuclear Japan, Germany, Canada, Sweden, Denmark, Norway,
Netherlands, Australia, New Zealand have either actually taken
punitive measures or are publicly threatening to do so against nuclear
India. Not only that, immediately after the blasts, the level of
personal security for the Prime Minister had to be raised and the Home
Minister predicted that now Pakistan would step up its hostile
activities in Kashmir. In effect, the blasts have caused radical
deterioration of India's 'security' environment and very substantial
erosion of its political clout and 'power' in the international arena.
A section of the Left (and centrist parties) have claimed that the
blasts (and the anti-Chinese tirade of the Indian Defence Minister
that preceded these) have been occasioned by American promptings from
behind the scene and this is a part of imperialist grand design to
encircle and corner China. This proposition is evidently a product of
a fossilised mindset, pathologically disinterested in and incapable of
comprehending the ambient reality. Interestingly, the official Chinese
response itself has quite clearly pinpointed India's internal
political compulsions, and not any external stimulus, as the cause of
these blasts. In fact, as of now, the American establishment does not
have any policy for aggressive containment of the People's Republic of
China, notwithstanding the fact that there are some voices (e.g.
former Senator Larry Pressler or the House Speaker Newt Gingritch)
within it, who by no means represent the mainstream, clamouring for
building up of India to counter the potential Chinese challenge. The
fact that America has taken leading initiative to ensure imposition of
collective sanctions against India clearly reveals the hollowness of
this theory. As a matter of fact, it is the BJP/RSS led government of
India, which is trying to hard sell the idea that the "Hindu" India is
keen to play the role of American gendarme in South Asia (as the
Zionist state of Israel is doing in the Middle East) provided the
Clinton administration concurs with their project of making India
"Hindu"and in the process winks at their nuclear adventurism and such
other aberrations. It is precisely with this intention they have
opened the floodgate of concessions to the American multinationals
ready to do business in and with India, so that they are enticed to
lobby on their behalf together with the American politicians
appreciative of this proposition. If, in spite of all this and some
initial softness, the Clinton administration has toughened its stand,
without completely closing the channels of communication, it is
because of its serious and determined efforts to get the CTBT ratified
by the American legislators in the teeth of dogged Republican
opposition and eventually implemented by the international community.
In a broadly similar manner, any suggestion that the blasts were
prompted essentially by the Indian owning classes, notwithstanding the
BJP/RSS led central government's likely attempts to appease the
business and the industry through some 'tough' anti-working class and
pro-liberalisation measures taken under the cover of ultra-nationalist
frenzy generated by the blasts, would be quite out of tune with the
actual reality. The blasts by themselves do not reflect and further
the interests of the Indian owning classes, large sections of which
are too keen to integrate with the world economy, in any fundamental
sense. The realisation that this adventurist act on the part of the
Sangh Combine may inflict heavy damage on the Indian economy (and the
polity as well), made easier by the sanctions imposed by the various
developed countries, has already made a section of this class quite
jittery about all this (as exemplified by the ET editorial quoted
above). This fact needs to be clearly recognised as it admits of the
possibility (though not inevitability) of building up of a 'national'
front against the fascists, broadly in line with what had happened
during the authoritarian Bonapartist Emergency Raj of Indira Gandhi in
the late seventies.
If the 'soft Hinduism' of the Congress variety did actually
legitimise and consequently help promote the 'hard Hindutva' of the
Sangh Combine, instead of combating it, the 'soft (and competitive)
nationalism' of the anti-BJP parties, in response to the Combine's
carefully orchestrated plan to stir up national jingoism from the
vantage position of the seat of central power, is also not destined to
meet with any different fate. The sinister design of the Sangh
Combine, the two(!) installment blasts (coinciding with the release
of a special commemorative issue of the RSS organ Organiser on Nuclear
India) being only the tip of the proverbial iceberg, can be combated
only through determined and principled adherence to and championing of
the cause of pluralism, secularism, egalitarianism and democracy, at
least on the part of those who look upon themselves as the potential
vanguards in this battle. In the instant case, in order to stall the
rising and menacing tide of national jingoism, which is being
deliberately caused as a part of the fascist agenda, there is
absolutely no alternative to militant pacifism with serious and
principled commitment to the cause of international peace and
disarmament.
By their latest action, the Sangh Parivar has yet
again demonstrated that they would not desist from even the most
extreme form of adventurism, as and when the opportunity arises or is
engineered. No amount of 'multi speak' or tactical zigzag on their
part can obliterate this simple truth. Under the present
circumstances, even partial surrender to the passions of national
chauvinism will prove disastrous as it would ideologically and
politically disarm even the hard core followers of the anti-BJP
parties, not to speak of the larger masses, and make them extremely
vulnerable against the further onslaughts of the fascist Combine. The
initial dithering on the part of the various opposition parties has
already made things quite a bit difficult. But all is not yet lost. A
number of protest demonstrations organised by numerous small groups
and eminent intellectuals/activists all across the country has shaken,
if not shattered, the myth of 'national consensus'. This must be
built upon by standing firm, resolute, determined and speaking up
clearly and loudly urging the 'nation' to get united against the
unfolding sinister anti-India conspiracy of installing a "Hindu"
fascist regime. There is no other option left.