Bihar’s Index Finger

The BJP has always been adept at presenting different faces for different states. After 26/11, Maharashtra and Mumbai delivered the biggest snub to the party when attempts by Narendra Modi and other BJP leaders to whip up emotions proved counterproductive. By the time the Lok Sabha polls took place last year, mainstream opinion in the party was that “emotional issues” were not working.

But Bihar is also the state where the party always sheds its “Hindu” skin. It is the only state where Narendra Modi has never been invited to campaign, even at the height of his popularity. The BJP’s deputy chief minister in that state, the quiet and reasonable Sushil Kumar Modi, always plays a clear second fiddle to Chief Minister Nitish Kumar. Partymen in Bihar joke, “We like our Modi, not the Gujarati Modi.”

Hence it’s good politics to contradict the Sena line, defend north Indian migrants in Mumbai and assert the right of all Indians to settle anywhere. Maharashtra lost, the Bihar citadel must not be breached. “We have to get pragmatic about politics. And it also fits in with our convictions,” says Vinay Sahasrabuddhe, political aide to BJP president Nitin Gadkari. Both happen to be Maharashtrians.

Should the ground realities change, however, the BJP would have no hesitation in adopting any kind of chauvinism—regional, communal or caste-based.

The BJP may have opted to sound reasonable (particularly in comparison to the Thackeray cousins and in this case even the ncp and the local Congress), but it’s all within its own ideological horizons. ‘Pakistanis’, ‘Shahrukh Khan’—these remain troubled categories and the party has been careful not to defend either. When pressed by Outlook, BJP spokesman Prakash Javadekar engaged in some careful positioning. “Anyone will agree with the pain Shahrukh feels at the exclusion of the Pakistani cricketers,” he said. “But who excluded them? Was it not the owners of the IPL teams?” Asked if the BJP would criticise the Sena for running a campaign against Shahrukh and his new film My Name Is Khan, he said, “We don’t approve of many of their policies. We are separate parties.”

Indeed, the BJP has no choice but to distance itself from the Sena, for otherwise, it’s doomed in the rest of India. Besides, although this decision comes from the compulsions of realpolitik, it helps that it also fits in neatly with the larger Sangh ideology that national identity takes precedence over other identities, be it regional, religious or any other. It’s a reflection of the state of affairs in the party that it was only after RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat asserted this forcefully in public that BJP leaders began to defend the rights of migrants.

And there was nothing extraordinary in its distancing from the Sena. The party is quite adept at distancing itself from the  actions of allies and even affiliates. If VHP/Bajrang Dal cadres burn down houses, the BJP declares those are separate outfits. In fact, that was one of the reasons Naveen Patnaik dumped the BJP. So if the Sena behaves unreasonably, it’s a different party. If an RSS leader says something outrageous, it’s a “cultural organisation”. The BJP tries to be all things to all men. Every now and then, though, a little prejudice comes in handy. At other times, prejudice is inconvenient and must be junked.