Commentary/Vir Sanghvi

Never condemn the VHP-- you never know
when you will need them

At that time, many Muslims responded that it was not the Babri Masjid that mattered. Yes, all right, it was just another mosque while Hindus claimed that the spot marked the birthplace of a great god. But the moment Muslims said that they were willing to relocate the mosque, a sort of saffron domino effect would come into play and they would be forced to abandon one mosque after another on similar grounds.

They pointed out that the VHP had already identified Mathura and Kashi as suitable locations for Ayodhya-style agitations. Muslims could not, therefore, afford to give way on the Babri Masjid.

This argument was repeatedly put to the BJP leadership by the media. Without exception, the party's senior leaders -- L K Advani, A B Vajpayee, Murli Manohar Joshi, etc. -- reiterated that Mathura and Kashi were VHP issues. They were not on the BJP agenda and Muslims were mistaken about the domino effect.

I was never terribly convinced by this assurance. Hadn't Ayodhya been a VHP issue as well? That didn't stop the BJP from clambering onto the rath when there were votes to be garnered.

My doubts grew in the aftermath of the Ayodhya demolition. I still remember the scene in the Lok Sabha after L K Advani was arrested. BJP members stormed the well of the House and prevented the proceedings from taking place.

One of their slogans had a familiar ring to it. It was, Yeh to keval jhaanki hai, Kashi Mathura baaki hai.

That's right. The old VHP issue was now a BJP slogan. And far from backing down after the Ayodhya debacle, the BJP was actually flaunting its willingness to create more trouble on the same kind of issue.

Though the BJP has been quiet about Mathura-Kashi since then, the issue did crop up as a VHP agitation during the brief life of the BJP-supported Mayawati government in UP. It protested when Mayawati refused to permit a puja at the mandir and that refusal was linked -- in some a accounts, at least -- to the BJP's decision to withdraw support to her government.

After Ayodhya, we know the pattern. The VHP raises the issues, the BJP distances itself from the demands and then when the time is right, makes the issues its own.

The VHP has now raised the Mathura issue again. And I wonder how the BJP will react. It has portrayed itself as a moderate party that has left the madness of the Ayodhya years behind and moved to the middle ground under the leadership of A B Vajpayee.

It is easy enough to test the BJP's new-found moderation. Under Advani, the formula was always the same: distance yourself from the VHP but never condemn its demands -- you never know when you will need them.

If the party has really changed, then there is a simple enough test. Even a person who is sympathetic to the VHP's claims on Mathura and Kashi will recognise that there are many ways of resolving disputes without insisting that mosques are shifted or destroyed.

It cannot take much for Atal Behari Vajpayee -- so moderate and reasonable in his public statements -- to see that what the VHP is asking for poses a threat to the stability of India. All he has to do is to condemn the VHP's objective.

He needs to say that it is quite intolerable for one community to keep demanding that another shift its places of worship and that the BJP guarantees to the Muslims that it will oppose any attempt to move or demolish the Mathura and Kashi mosques.

Simple enough? I think so. If Vajpayee wants to indicate that his BJP is different then he must condemn what Advani would only distance himself from.

Will he do it? I don't know. But I rather think that we will judge him on the decision he comes to on issues such as this one.