The ruling and Opposition parties of Punjab and of Haryana who were fighting to “protect their respective states interests” in SYL waters had to suspend, at least for the present, their confrontationist acts after the March 17 Supreme Court order maintaining status quo on SYL canal issue.

A few months back, in his interview with Punjab chief minister Parkash Singh Badal, a prominent English Daily’s Editor had described him as shrewdest politician. Latest happenings show that his comment about Badal was not wide off the mark! This is proved by Badal’s latest move to get the Punjab Assembly pass a unanimous resolution on March 18 to not to allow the construction on the SYL “come what may” giving a new dimension to the SYL issue. The Supreme Court’s reaction to Punjab’s defiant action will be known when it takes up the issue by March end.

Ironically, Prime Minister Modi and his government have so far remained mute spectators to the divisive happenings on the SYL dispute between Punjab which is governed by the NDA alliance partners Akali Dal and BJP and Haryana where BJP is in power.

India’s federal polity provides a Constitutional device for bringing unity in diversity and for the achievement of common national goals. The country’s federal character has become a victim of the SYL dispute. Both the states were guilty for ‘violating’ the Constitutional provision.

In this background it will not be irrelevant to briefly dwell on the SYL dispute. Akalis and Congress were part of the tripartite agreement on river waters sharing between Punjab, Haryana and Rajasthan in 1981 and also when the Rajiv-Longowal Accord was signed on July 24, 1985.

Acquisition of land for the SYL canal began in February 1978 when the chief minister was Parkash Singh Badal whose government had also accepted money for the canal’s construction from Haryana government then ruled by Badals family friend Devi Lal. The Rajiv-Longowal Accord also provided that “the construction of the SYL canal shall continue. The canal shall be completed by 15 August 1986”. The Supreme Court had in January 2002 ordered that “if Punjab failed to carry out work on the canal and make it functional in a year, it was the Centre’s responsibility to step in and get the construction completed through its own agencies as expeditiously as possible”.

But all these decisions lost their validity after the Capt. Amarinder Singh-led Congress government enacted Punjab Termination of Agreements Act in 2004 which cancelled all agreements of Punjab with neighbouring states in sharing of Ravi, Beas and Satluj waters. An angry Congress president Sonia Gandhi had reportedly taken exception to the Amarinder Singh-led state government’s decision to cancel the water sharing agreements. Twelve years ago, the President referred the matter to the Supreme Court which has now taken up the Presidential reference of the case.

Take the second issue of controversy over the Bharat Mata ki jai slogan. Political and partisan motives often prompt politicians to raise emotive and non-issues. The controversy over Bharat Mata ki jai slogan is one such issue.

There should be no controversy over raising the slogan Bharat Mata ki jai as it implies saying Jai Hind, the slogan coined for the Indian National Army Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose had raised for fighting for India’s Independence. The only difference is that by insisting on raising Bharat Mata ki jai’ slogan, the Sangh Parivar has tried to promote its brand of patriotism.

The controversy over the slogan was triggered after the RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat declared that India is a Hindu nation and that a nationalist is one who can “spontaneously chant Bharat Mata ki jai.”

Suspecting ‘devious’ intentions behind Bhagwat’s statement, Asaduddin Owaisi chief of the All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) publicly declared that he would never shout Bharat Mata ki jai.

The developments since the formation of the Modi-led government 22 months ago have led to communal polarization of India. First it was the provocative utterances of the bhagva- Hinduatva extremists including some BJP MPs who injected communal virus dividing the Indian polity. Then their extremist Muslim counterparts like Asaduddin Owaisis who are trying to deepen the vertical and horizontal communal divide.

Plato had not wrongly said that “Wise men speak because they have something to say; fools because they have to say something”.

It is time for our “ultra patriotic” politicians and also for those countering them with their own extremist actions to introspect. They should remember that religion could not bind Pakistan and it would pose a threat to India’s unity if these forces continue with their divisive actions. (IPA Service)