Instead of cooperating with the SIT in a democratic spirit and answering the many questions raised about his role in the state-supported violence by former Director General of Police RB Sreekumar, countless victims, numerous independent inquiries, and the Tehelka sting operation disclosures, Mr. Modi questioned the SIT's legality on unconvincing grounds and only later agreed to appear before it, gracelessly.

Such dodging is of a piece with Mr. Modi's conduct in 2002, when he attacked another statutory body, the Election Commission, in an especially vile manner by accusing its chief JM Lyngdoh of anti-Hindu animus on account of his being a Christian from Meghalaya. Mr. Modi has a lot to cover up as regards his role in cooking up the myth that the Godhra train fire was planned by Muslims, and they must be taught a lesson through mass-scale violence unleashed with state complicity.

As if to remind the world that Gujarat will long remain an abnormal state, the state BJP felicitated its newly appointed president Ranchhodbhai C Faldu by weighing him against 75 litres of blood contained in 312 bottles collected from volunteers. This literal solidarity among “blood brothers” expresses a revolting form of militarism typical of fascists and extreme Right-wing groups who define their politics primarily through hatred and “holy war” (whether dharmayuddha or jehad).

As if in dramatic coincidence, these two episodes symbolically demonstrate the Rightward direction in which the BJP is moving after its two consecutive routs in national elections, and major changes in leadership with the stepping down of Mr. LK Advani as the Leader of the Opposition and the replacement of party president Rajnath Singh by Mr. Nitin Gadkari.

The same direction is faithfully expressed in the organisational reshuffle executed by Mr. Gadkari. It bears recalling that Mr. Gadkari, a Maharashtrian Brahmin from Nagpur, with an RSS background, but with no political experience outside the state's Vidarbha region, was nominated to the BJP's top post by none other than Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh sarasanghachalak Mohan Bhagwat, also a Maharashtrian Brahmin. Mr. Gadkari has repeatedly sworn his loyalty to Hindutva.

The RSS is pleased as punch about this. Sangh ideologue MG Vaidya expressed his satisfaction with Mr. Gadkari: “After 2009, the BJP says Hindutva is their soul. The soul is invisible but gives urja (energy). It's good that the same energy is being remembered in 2010.” That sums up the substance of the generational transition in the BJP leadership after the eclipse of the Vajpayee-Advani duo: the BJP is back on a track which allows the RSS to exercise greater control over it.

When he took over as party president three months ago, Mr. Gadkari emphasised the importance of managerial-style efficiency, as well as Hindutva. Cadres would be judged without fear or favour, entirely on their performance and merit. Mr. Gadkari promised to put the party back in order and on an upward trajectory. But the composition of his new team, with a 121-strong national executive, belies that pledge.

The new team is strong on the glamour quotient, but weak on acumen, competence and experience. Thus, faded Bollywood celebrity Hema Malini was made a party vice-president. Character actress Kiron Kher (little known for her political activity) and soap opera star Smriti Irani were appointed to the national executive. And MP Navjot Singh Sidhu, known for his tasteless humour and poor Parliamentary performance, and charged with beating an old man to death, was elevated to the post of secretary. So was Mr. Varun Gandhi, the BJP's own shoddy version of dynastic politics.

Mr. Gadkari was evidently keen to reserve 33 per cent of the party's top posts for women. So five of the 11 vice-presidents are women, including relative non-entities like Ms Karuna Shukla (Mr. Vajpayee's niece) and Kiran Ghai. Similarly, there is greater symbolic representation for Muslims and Dalits. But even more important is the enlarged presence of RSS cadres among BJP office-bearers, such as Mr. Ram Lal, who has been made general secretary (organisation) with two joint general secretaries V Satish and Saudan Singh under him. Not to be missed is the appointment as secretary of Mr. B Muralidhar Rao, of the Swadeshi Jagran Manch, an RSS front.

Mr. Gadkari's choices reflect the RSS's preference for a clear line of demarcation between the party organisation, on the one hand, and, on the other, the BJP's parliamentary wing, headed by the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha Sushma Swaraj and her counterpart in the Rajya Sabha Arun Jaitley. The latter two recently asserted their primacy in the BJP by claiming to have ensured a more organised and disciplined performance on the part of the BJP during the current session of Parliament than the Congress. The claim is unconvincing. For instance, on the women's reservations Bill, confessed the party's chief whip in the Lok Sabha, as many as 70 percent of BJP MPs expressed their opposition—some publicly.

Things aren't hunky-dory even within the new organisational set-up. Messrs Shahnawaz Husssain and Prakash Javadekar, two of the BJP's seven spokespersons, boycotted their first meeting. Mr. Hussain apparently resents being denied the post of party general secretary. He has said he would go to Mecca and Medina, “offer my prayers, and also repent for my sins”. Mr. Javadekar is miffed because he was expecting a “bigger role”. The Thakur lobby too is unhappy at its low representation. Bihar MP Rajiv Pratap Rudy has said so in so many words.

The Southern states are poorly represented amongst BJP office-bearers. They only comprise Messrs Venkaiah Naidu, Ananth Kumar and Muralidhar Rao, and Ms Nirmala Sitharaman. Although the BJP rules in Karnataka, and regards it as the gateway to the South, its sole notable representative from there is Mr. Ananth Kumar. By contrast, tiny Himachal Pradesh is over-represented. Mr. Gadkari has a lame response to this: “I personally feel I tried to accommodate everybody. I can't satisfy everybody. If anyone has any problem he has a right to discuss it with me.”

The new team compares extremely poorly with the BJP's standard-bearers during its heyday, with top leaders Vajpayee and Advani, supported by second-generation leaders like Messrs K N Govindacharya, Pramod Mahajan, Arun Jaitley and the pre-2002 Narendra Modi. Mr. Govindacharya's absence is especially significant. One of the ablest strategists produced by the Sangh parivar, he was the architect of “social engineering” which created a confluence between Mandal (OBC parties) and Kamandal (Hindutva politics) and powered the party's rise to power first in Uttar Pradesh, and then, nationally.

Of the BJP's 10 general secretaries, only two—Ms Vasundhara Raje (who was forced to resign as the Leader of the Opposition in Rajasthan), and Mr. Ravi Shankar Prasad—have anything approaching a national profile. All this testifies to the dearth of talent in the BJP. As things stand, the party's Parliamentary Board, including Messrs Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi, Venkaiah Naidu, Rajnath Singh and Arun Jaitley, enjoy a higher stature and more power than Mr. Gadkari's team. This gap is unlikely to be bridged given the talent deficit and the disproportion between effective influence furnished by parliamentary representation, and organisational posts in a party that's out of power.

Talent apart, the BJP lacks something more fundamental: a political strategy to overcome its decline over the past decade. From a party well-entrenched in the Hindi heartland and about a dozen other states, it has a sizeable presence left only in the Central and Western states of Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat and Chhattisgarh, in Northern Himachal Pradesh and Uttarakhand, and more shakily, in Karnataka and Bihar, where it plays second fiddle to the Janata Dal (United). The BJP has suffered erosion both nationally and in major states like UP, Maharashtra and Bihar.

Only a combination of factors can stem the BJP's decline: an independent ideology that clearly and unambiguously sets it apart from the ultra-sectarian and rabidly communal RSS; policies and programmes which have a broad, inclusive appeal; and a political mobilisation strategy that can help it rebuild its shrunken base.

The BJP lacks all three. It has decisively failed to make a break with Hindutva. If it couldn't sever the umbilical cord with the RSS during its years in national power, it won't do so now. It has no imaginative policies that can attract it mass support. And it has no political strategy on any issue, including the Ayodhya Mandir. (IPA Service)