ARVIND KEJRIWAL, ARTICLE 370 AND A BLIND ALLEY

- subhash gatade

“He came, he saw and he concurred“

– Caption of a RK Laxman cartoon in early 90 s



AAP’s stand on article 370 has confused and disheartened many.

For its workers the party has opened itself to attacks by its adversaries
because of its support to stripping of statehood for Jammu and Kashmir and
thus weakening its own plank for full statehood for Delhi which was its key
slogan during the 2019 Lok Sabha campaign.

A section of its fellow-travelers who had high hopes of the experiment,
activists/scholars – who were rather enthused with its ‘participatory’
approach – also feel betrayed or disheartened now.

It is a different matter that not many have made their displeasure known.

May be it is a sign of their increasing fatigue or possible cynicism with
politics in general, they have preferred to share their frustrations at
private levels only.

A long-time friend with whom one had taken baby steps in left politics and
who later changed his track, became a camp follower of the ‘*Mai Bhi Anna*‘
brigade, – called me in frustration:  ‘How can he do that ? Does not he
understands that it is a challenge to constitutional governance and federal
division of power in India’ and how it would further ‘stoke and strengthen
majoritarian politics in the country’. It is a different matter his
differences with AK ended then and there and he like many others did not go
public with his frustration and anger.

Of late, one notices that the silence – among supporters/fellow travellers
– which largely engulfed AAP’s ‘unprincipled’ decision is slowly melting
and dissenting ( or should one say ‘perturbed’) voices are being heard.

Close on the heels of a leader of the Narmada movement from Madhya Pradesh
– who has been associated with AAP from its inception – who raised her
objection to AAP’s decision and who even claimed to raise the issue at
higher levels in the party in future, now comes the news that one of its
‘well-wisher, and someone who has been seriously supportive of the Aam
Aadmi Party (AAP) through all the ups and downs in the years since its
formation’ has also decided to speak out as he feels ‘perturbed by..
developments (
https://kafila.online/2019/08/20/nationalism-and-politics-an-open-letter-to-arvind-kejriwal/)
and has written an ‘open letter’ to Kejriwal.

..extraordinary situation that has been created in this country with the
unilateral, stealthy and therefore cowardly abrogation of article 370 and
the locking down of the state of Kashmir, stationing anything between 50,
000 to 1 lakh troops in the state, arresting reportedly almost 4000 leaders
and activists belonging to different political parties and completely
shutting down the media. (-do-)

1.

The ‘open letter’ seems to be a bag of mixed emotions.

There is a sense of worry, concern, disquiet which is simultaneously tinged
with few queries, suggestions and advice as well. It is tinged with little
expression of grief over the state of affairs in the country.

There are places where the letter even sounds more like reminding the
architect of this move – namely Arvind Kejriwal – his ‘ideals’ (‘*Gandhi is
your lodestar, by your own account*‘) and asking him to think what he (
Gandhi) would have done in similar situation if he would have
discovered ‘..*using
the armed might of the state, abrogating all civil liberties, putting
thousands of people behind bars? Would he have welcomed this move*?’ or at
places even explaining his stand to a wider populace

..your nationalism is different from Gandhi’s and that you felt compelled
to support the government, did you not feel the need, at the same time to
at least say a few words at the unprecedented violence and immense
cowardice of this murder of democracy? I am sure you know why I call this
move cowardly. ..

There is a sense of bewilderment also that when even someone like Raj
Thackreay ‘*could  see the game behind this so-called nationalist move*‘
whereas Kejriwal badly failed and did not even feel the need to ‘*qualify
his support to the government*‘  which is then followed by a query :

Is it because the Delhi elections are round the corner that you choose to
keep silent even on this minimum? If that is so, that would be a very sad
situation.

The writer has also underlined his appreciation of the move by opposition
parties that they are coming together ‘*to demand the minimum – the release
of all the leaders and activists arrested*‘ in Kashmir and is also of the
opinion that when larger issues of principles arise – *fate of one
government should not matter*‘.

At the end of the letter, the writer advises Kejriwal that he should
develop his ‘*politics now*‘ ( of course, not like a ‘loony leftist’ !) and
explains what does politics means, how it is not ‘fighting particular
issues’ but it is also about

..expanding the circle of friends and identifying the enemy; it is about
being aware that the field you function in, is already populated by vested
interests and even doing a simple thing like providing good and cheap
education is a veritable battle. You rally your forces and isolate the
enemy.

2.

Let me admit that coming from someone who has been a supporter of AAP and
who has even helped him at some level in elections, this ‘open letter’
needs to be welcomed – not only because writer has voiced his concern
openly – but also because taking a stand on this sensitive issue, where one
even witnesses a mass frenzy of sorts, taking your neck out has its own
disadvantages.

It does not mean I do not have my disagreements with how it analyses the
predicament in which AAP finds itself today, where it is seen supporting a
move which has even been described as ‘constitutional coup’ by
academics/scholars. (
https://thewire.in/government/kashmir-article-370-constitutional-coup-aftereffects
)

Looking at the tone of the letter it is clear that the writer feels that
there would be some discussion on his observations which he has made public
(may be for want of any proper forum to voice his opinion) or at least
there would be some official/unofficial response to it.

As an outsider one can just wish him luck for this little expectation.

This pen pusher has his own doubts about any such response because earlier
experiences in this case have not been encouraging. e.g. We have before us
the experience of founder members of AAP (
https://www.epw.in/journal/2014/10/web-exclusives/ideology-suspended-animation.html)
like Ms Madhu Madhuri – who happened to be a diplomat, when she was shouted
down in a meeting just because she wanted to raise the ‘act of
vigilantism’  by ‘supporters of AAP’ targetting African women.

It is now history how senior leaders like Prashant Bhushan and Yogendra
Yadav – who were even founder members of the party – were expelled from the
party without much discussion (
https://www.livemint.com/Politics/DQqviVgfEGr2mBbMWLyURI/Yogendra-Yadav-Prashant-Bhushan-removed-from-AAPs-National.html
).

Observers have noted how Kejriwal took full control of the party after
coming to power ‘*The founding members of the party who had objected to
Kejriwal taking unilateral decisions, allotting tickets to tainted
candidates, sidestepping swarajya, and cautioning against personality-cult
politics were purged from the party. ..The party seemed to have faked the
values of high morality and probity in public life to create a false
perception among the people for political traction and electoral victory*.’
(
https://www.epw.in/journal/2017/17/web-exclusives/aap-has-decimated-historic-mandate-alternative-politics.html
)

3.

Coming to the ‘open letter’ would it be correct to say that support for
BJP’s move on article 370 can be seen as a reflection of Kejriwal’s
understanding of nationalism as the writer feels constrained to say ?

While one needs to further unpack this understanding, one feels that this
‘piecemeal approach’ focusing on a particular decision – may / may not
explain the reasons behind this about turn.

We need to (at least) relook/revisit some of the earlier ( or latest)
controversial statements/ stands taken by Arvind Kejriwal.

If a differing view of ‘nationalism’ could be spotted as the reason for
Kejriwal’s support to abrogation of article 370, then  how does one explain
his claims merely few months before elections when he made statements which
were construed as ‘polarising’ ! One can recall when AAP’s chances of an
alliance with Congress, finally fizzled out Kejriwal claimed in a press
conference – that according to ‘our survey, no Hindu will vote for Congress
anyway. Muslims were initially confused, but now they will vote for us,”.
No details of the survey were ever provided, the claim was clearly
construed as a statement which aimed at ‘polarising’ voters on religious
basis. It was also seen as a growing realisation within AAP’s ranks that
ground is rapidly slipping from below their feet and election results
vindicated it rather badly.

The abysmal performance of AAP was reflected in the fact that not only all
its seven candidates lost the elections but five even lost their deposits.
What had added salt to the wounds was that the party had lost even to the
Congress. From a vote share of 54 per cent in 2015 and 67 out of 70 seats
in the assembly,  to just 18 per cent in 2019.

Atishi Marlena – the party’s key face in the elections to the parliament –
for who deputy Chief Minister had campaigned rather aggressively, was a
distant third, losing even to Congress’s Arvind Singh Lovely.  Remember how
Atishi – daughter of Marxist parents who had named her in a different
manner – was rediscovered as a ‘Punjabi Hindu’ during elections, supposedly
to blunt the opposition propaganda that she was a ‘Christian’ but that also
did not help her in any way.

Was not it a sign of desperation in the ranks of AAP that they had to go
for a ‘makeover’ of Atishi Marlena and project her as ‘Punjabi Hindu’ and
it had no qualms that all these steps were hitting at its claim to be a
flag-bearer of ‘alternative politics’.

Analysts have also noted ‘perceptible attempt at reinforcing Kejriwal’s own
identity as a ‘Hindu’’ post elections.

On June 4, 12 days after the Lok Sabha poll results, Kejriwal  retweeted a
picture, “Swaminarayan Bhagwan Ka Abhishek’ (Kejriwal performing Abhishek
of Swaminarayan ji) and went on to retweet four more pictures tweeted by
the party’s official Twitter handle.

A day before, on July 4, Kejriwal had tweeted Eid greetings in a simple and
unobtrusive manner, “Aap sabhi ko eid Mubarak”, there were no pictures.

(
https://www.news18.com/news/politics/hindu-politics-zero-attacks-on-modi-kejriwals-new-strategy-ahead-of-herculean-delhi-polls-2275119.html
)

One can also look at his announcement of free bus rides for women, which
was done on Independence Day – which also happened to coincide with Raksha
Bandhan and its implementation will begin on Bhai Dooj.

It also adds

Kejriwal had welcomed the court verdict in the Kathua gang-rape and murder
of a minor, however, his silence on the lack of conviction of the six
accused in the Pehlu Khan lynching case was too loud to go unnoticed. In
the latter instance, Kejriwal did not even tweet. He delegated the same to
his deputy Manish Sisodia. (-do-)

One can even look at Kejriwal’s latest statement on the economic slowdown.

Die hard supporters of the government have not minced words in lambasting
the government for its ‘wrong economic and labour policies’ and have
demanded ‘immediate course correction in the current economic and labour
reform path the government has undertaken’ (
https://www.businesstoday.in/current/economy-politics/rss-trade-union-urgent-steps-revive-auto-manufacturing-sectors-protest-govt-wrong-policies/story/373810.html)
or central government’s policy advisors have themselves admitted that
India’s economy is witnessing a slowdown, government’s hand-picked Chief to
the NITI Aayog seems ringing ‘[t]he alarm bell, calls for unprecedented
steps’ from the government, but Kejriwal seems to be hopeful.

In a public meeting he openly declared that he has ‘[F]aith in Centre to
Deal With Economic Slowdown; Delhi Govt Will Give Full Support’. He said
that this  ‘[i]s one situation where the country has to stand as one and
repair the economy’ (
https://www.news18.com/news/politics/have-faith-in-centre-to-deal-with-economic-slowdown-delhi-govt-will-give-full-support-says-kejriwal-2281093.html
)

Perhaps somebody should ask him why should people further suffer – by
supporting the government – when the government’s pro-rich, pro-crony
capitalist economic policies, which played further havoc with steps like
demonetisation (DeMo) have landed us in this situation and despite enough
warnings not only from opposition but its own advisers is still not ready
to revise them nor express regrets for steps like DeMo.

4.

To be very frank, the experiment of AAP, which was seen as a ‘*beginning of
a new bandwidth of alternative politics in the political spectrum of India*‘
(
https://www.epw.in/journal/2017/17/web-exclusives/aap-has-decimated-historic-mandate-alternative-politics.html)
by many, who also had high hopes of it writing ‘*a new grammar and syntax
of democratic politics in India*‘ (-do-) has lost its steam.

It is for everyone to see that with all that grandiose talks of
‘alternative politics’ what has emerged is a grand caricature of the very
idea itself. The great warrior against corruption – which was presented to
us by the media and buttressed by a section of the confused intelligentsia
many of whom had lost hope from the ‘loony left’ – appears like a pale
shadow of himself.

The manner in which Mr Kejriwal who had begun his innings as a chief
minister by taking a confrontationist stand against the government and who
had once even made ‘[a] wild public allegation’ that attempts were on to
‘physically liquidate him’ (
https://www.epw.in/journal/2017/17/web-exclusives/aap-has-decimated-historic-mandate-alternative-politics.html)
has suddenly started discovering virtues in every other step of the
government.

Kejriwal’s metamorphosis has even prompted even biting comments from some
of those who were once enthusiastic about the whole experiment. A famous
fact checker even captioned his post on Kejriwal – wherein he was seen
singing paens to the government about its ability to deal with economic
slowdown – as ‘*Chowkidar Kejriwal*.’

One was suddenly reminded of a R K Laxman cartoon published in early
nineties depicting the power struggle between Sharad Pawar and Narasimha
Rao – who was then Prime Minister of India. It is part of history how Pawar
had to finally submit to the authority of Rao.The cartoon  over these
developments with few illustrations was captioned ‘*He came, he saw and he
concurred*‘.

How the AAP experiment would further unfold remains to be seen but as the
‘open letter’ suggests many people who were once fascinated with the idea
are suddenly finding themselves in a blind alley.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"humanrights movement" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/humanrights-movement/CAJGPqcYfKadj7Y0nXfc1g6OSHypAckSNoAjEd3xij%3D4GYN8dyw%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to