If one goes by the prime minister’s past record of refusing to condemn the 2002 massacre in Gujarat when he was state’s chief minister, his preferring silence over the hate and communally provocative utterances of some saffron leaders and also RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat’s declaration that India is a Hindu Rashtra, the answer of the first question will be a big ‘No’.

In politics, survival instinct changes those in power. Modi’s latest statement on religious tolerance ostensibly shows his acceptance of the reality that India being a pluralistic, multi–cultural and secular nation, his government will have to keep this fact in mind in governing and formulating policies. Before analyzing the facts that have brought about the change in Modi’s outlook, a brief account of the prime minister’s statement made at the Christians religious function in New Delhi in the outgoing week. He said “My government will not allow any religious group, belonging to the majority or the minority, to incite hatred against others, overtly or covertly. Mine will be a government that gives equal respect to all religions and protect the right of every individual to adopt and retain the religion of their choice.”

These welcome comments acquire importance in the backdrop of the silence Modi has been maintaining on the Hindutva hardliners activities which have been polluting the country’s communal atmosphere.

Three main factors appear to have brought about the ostensible change in Modi’s attitude First, US President Barack Obama’s address at a New Delhi meeting at the end of his three day visit, cautioning his host country that “India will succeed so long as it is not splintered along lines of religious faith, and is unified as one nation. Our (Indian and American) diversity is our strength and we have to guard against any efforts to divide ourselves along sectarian lines or any other lines”.

The second factor was Modi’s obvious realization that the rising cases of communal intolerance in the country would damage his global image he has so assiduously built during his visits to a number of countries. He must have felt concerned by the damaging editorials some leading foreign Dailies had written. The New York Times wrote: “Prime Minister Narendra Modi has been brought down to earth by domestic politics. He and his Bharatiya Janata Party, or B.J.P., were crushed in the election Tuesday for New Delhi’s 70-member state assembly, winning three seats while the upstart Aam Aadmi Party, or A.A.P., captured the rest…………Since sweeping to power last year with the biggest national victory in three decades, Mr. Modi and the BJP have generated an aura of invincibility, winning a succession of other state elections………..So far there has been little concrete return and as the Delhi election suggested, people are growing frustrated”.

A sidelight of Obama’s comments on religious tolerance and the US media’s critical comments about Modi and the BJP is that these have created an impression that Modi is acting under the influence of the US. The revelation that Modi’s offering of an olive branch to Nawaz Sharif has been at the instance of Obama, though a welcome development for the peace of the region, also lends support to the impression.

The third and the most crucial factor which has contributed to his and his BJP loyalists changed stance is the humiliating defeat the party suffered in Delhi assembly elections getting only three of the 70 seats which has dented Modi’s invincibility.

Another development which has so far escaped the needed attention is the active role RSS, claiming to be a “non-political, cultural and social body” has, overtly or covertly, started playing in politics. The happenings of the past few days indicate that the RSS has started openly interfering in the saffron party’s day-to-day functioning.

Often described as BJP’s ideological mentor, nobody should have any objection to the RSS bosses letting their views on important issues known to its political protégé. But when it starts taking exception to the actions of the party and questioning its decisions in choosing its allies and candidates for contesting elections and also for deciding the terms of its alliances, it is nothing but a blatant dabbling in the saffron party’s day-to-day political functioning. For instance, the RSS fortnightly mouthpiece “Panchjanya” in an issue raised an objection over the BJP’s selection of Kiran Bedi as the candidate in Delhi elections and its ignoring the party workers in the polls.

India’s national mainstream parties have their frontal organizations which are usually led by their loyalists. By fighting for their causes the parties try to mobilize political support for organizing their political agitations and for fighting elections. BJP also has its frontal outfits through which it mobilizes popular support to promote its political and electoral causes. But the RSS’s interference in the party’s functioning and its being an advocate of Hindu Rashtra will sooner or later create misgivings among the followers of the party’s frontal bodies.

While the foregoing developments offer opportunities to the opposition parties to open offensives against Hindutva outfits, these enjoin upon the latter to introspect and devise their policies by treating India as a multilateral and multi-religious country. (IPA Service)