Gujarati society have their own reasons for keeping quiet after the TEHELKA exposé

From Tehelka Magazine, Vol 4, Issue 47, Dated Dec 08 , 2007
CURRENT AFFAIRS
essay

A Criminal Silence Speaking

Different sections of Gujarati society have their own reasons for keeping quiet after the TEHELKA exposé, says GHANSHYAM SHAH
Illustration: Sudeep Chaudhuri

TEHELKA’S OPERATION KALANK exposes the depressing socio-political situation in today’s Gujarat. Among other things the sting revealed the confessions of fanatic mass-murderers and rapists of their barbaric actions, the clear partisanship of the state and the questionable integrity of the judges who are supposed to carry out an impartial investigation of the 2002 carnage. The culprits do not have any sense of guilt about their actions. In fact they shared their information with pride. They are confident that they were safe under the present regime and that no one would touch them.

Such chilling revelations ought to have generated outrage among those who believe in civilisation, the rule of law and the common good. Alas, instead what we see is silence in the civil society in Gujarat. It is as if nothing had happened. There is no anger or anguish, particularly among those who write and talk day in and day out about morality and social values. This is indeed painful but not surprising for anyone who has observed Gujarat’s civil society in the last two decades. In fact, the line between the state and civil society has been blurred here because of economic development, the Hindu hegemony and the subjugation of the minorities. Civil society carries deep-rooted prejudices against Muslims, which they have imbibed in the course of their socialisation in family, neighbourhood and education.

To earn approval, popular writers, teachers and religious gurus reproduce their perception about the “others” not only uncritically but also with imaginative additions. Spicy anecdotes are blended to appear scholarly in their ‘creative’ literature, newspaper columns, public speeches and private conversations.To be fair to them, most of them do not subscribe to the Hindutva ideology and the moral policing by the VHP and Bajrang Dal. They did not endorse the inhuman violence against minorities in the post-Godhra rampage. But they do not feel a need to interrogate these ideas or events, nor do they feel a need to join public protests against the fanatic forces they do not support. Considering themselves nonpolitical, they refrain from taking a stand on public issues including political ideology, the functioning of the state or public violence.

They are largely guided by the Gujarati idiom “Mare shu? Maru Shu?” (Why should I bother? What would I get from this?). Such an attitude is euphemistically called pragmatism. Their cynicism is pervasive. At the same time they do not hesitate to agree with Narendra Modi that as per Newton’s law every action has a reaction, thus justifying the post Godhra massacre. “For the first time Hindus, who have otherwise been meek and mild have shown courage,” they say. Such conclusions have been reiterated after every riot since 1969. They adore Modi for his firmness, his Machiavellian statecraft and for promoting economic development. They believe that “his future is like the rising sun.”

There are of course a few individuals in mainstream Gujarati society who had, at various points in the past, publicly criticised the 2002 massacre. They also conceded Modi’s partisan role in the carnage. But, for them, neither the mass violence nor the abdication of Raj Dharma by the chief minister were compelling enough to take a stand against Modi. They, therefore, do not hesitate to shower praise on Modi for his leadership and support him in the forthcoming polls.

A tiny segment of civil society, which has always stood for secular politics and has vehemently criticised the post-Godhra carnage, has slowly expanded. Quite a few individuals who had maintained silence in 2002, are gradually raising their voices in public against the reduction of autonomy of universities and institutions such as the Sahitya Akademi and the Sangit, Nrutya and Natak (music, dance and drama) Akademi. They also joined protests against the rowdy elements who (with the tacit support of the state) prevented the release of the film Parzania and also harassed artists of MS University, Baroda. They also extended support to the programmes of some NGOs which are involved in the rehabilitation of the 2002 victims.

The TEHELKA exposé made them angry at the State as well as the Hindutva brigade both of which have become increasingly intrusive in the running of academic institutions in Gujarat. Operation Kalank has provided new ammunition to those civil society organisations which have been actively fighting for justice for the victims of the 2002 riots. Though the facts revealed by the sting were not unknown to them, their disgust at the Hindutva forces has magnified. They immediately felt a need for raising a collective voice of protest against Modi’s fascism. They called upon all the right-thinking people of Gujarat to break their silence and register their protest against the brutal and barbarous acts of Hindutva lunatics. They emphasised, “What is at stake is not merely the survival of constitutional values and the rule of law but the survival of civilisation itself in this country.”

On November 1, more than 250 concerned citizens in Ahmedabad staged a public protest.The TEHELKA exposé is not just a moral crusade for justice. It has a political dimension in the context of Gujarat’s present situation. I do not attribute motives other than highly professional ones to TEHELKA for their investigation. Nor do I subscribe to any conspiracy theory. The evidence is, no doubt, very valuable for a legal battle. But its potential for provoking a public outcry and political action remains limited.

Given the state of politics and civil society, the timing of the exposé is also significant. We are at the eve of elections in Gujarat. For most secular organisations and individuals the defeat of the BJP in general, and Modi in particular, is crucial in their long battle for the restoration of rule of law and justice in society. Therefore, some of them have expressed their strong objection to others’ demands for invoking President’s rule in Gujarat. They fear that such an act would help Modi in the election campaign. Some of them even felt that Modi must have been behind the sting operation as the footage of the sting operation told Hindus that only Modi protects them. Therefore, they are wary of taking up the revelations of the exposé as grist for the anti-Modi campaign.

Even active pro-Hindutva elements of civil society were stunned after viewing Operation Kalank. They were initially at a loss to react to the admissions BJP party members and Sangh Parivar activists had made in front of the camera. But then they decided their strategy would be to use Operation Kalank in their favour without ever publicly commenting on the evidence. I have subsequently learnt from certain sources that when Operation Kalank came to light, BJP workers prepared themselves to bring the issue of Hindutva to the centrestage again. They were, predictably, very keen to take the issue to the streets, if Muslims were to react the way they had after the demolition of Babri Masjid in 1992.

According to them, TEHELKA’s sting operation has turned Narendra Modi-the-hero to Narendra Modithe- superhero. One of the active pro-Hindutva columnists commented that the post-exposé situation has “proven Congressmen and BJP rebels to be pygmies… It (the sting) should be taken as a fortunate event that has given a new lease of life to the Hindutva wave that had been receding. Hindus has been becoming careless. The operation has again united all Hindus.” Though such observations may be taken as wishful thinking and propaganda on the part of Hindutva brigade, the fact remains that after the exposé, the VHP and the RSS have become mild in their opposition to Modi’s role in the coming elections.

Shah is a social scientist from Ahmedabad

WRITER’S E-MAIL
gshah18@hotmail.com