Read Vajpayee To Understand Nehru Well, Don’t Repeat Mistakes Of Emergency

We have several cases of excesses such as the infamous bulldozer justice and ignoring the over year-long crisis and carnage in Manipur about which neither Modi nor his government ever speak

A dream has been shattered, a song silenced, a flame has vanished in the infi-nite. It was the dream of a world without fear and without hunger. It was the song of an epic that had the echo of the Gita and the fragrance of the rose. It was the flame of a lamp that burnt all night, fought with every darkness, showed us the way, and one morning attained Nirvana.

– Atal Bihari Vajpayee on Nehru’s death.

In these days when the BJP leaders led by PM Narendra Modi criticise Neh-ru for no rhyme or reason and create ruckus in Parliament, I thought it is worthwhile to remind them of the grace with which two stalwarts – in fact statesmen – Nehru and Vajpayee dealt with each other and conducted the legislature proceedings with grace and mutual respect.

Of course, mutual respect and grace are rare commodities in the present context as the political discourse has degenerated to the lowest of low levels.

Nehru was so impressed by young Vajpayee’s talent that he had even pre-dicted that the then Bharatiya Jana Sangh MP would one day become the Prime Minister of India.

Vajpayee and Nehru, being political opponents, had their own differences. But they took care that the bitterness would not turn into enmity and that they would attack each other even without a slight provocation, as it hap-pens today with the BJP.

What can you say about Home Minister Amit Shah who makes a personal attack on leader of the opposition Rahul Gandhi on camera, during a media conclave by saying everybody knows why the Congress leaders make fre-quent foreign visits. And the Godi media anchor giggles and asks Shah to explain why!

Vajpayee, as the external affairs Minister in Janata Party rule in late 70s, had noticed that Nehru’s portrait was missing in the South Block. Some over enthusiastic bureaucrats must have got it removed as the Congress led by Indira Gandhi was badly battered in the post-Emergency elections. Vajpayee did not giggle or celebrate. Instead, he immediately got the portrait restored.

But today, even on the Vijay Divas marking the great surrender of the Paki-stan Army to India at Dhaka in 1971, BJP motormouth MP Nishikant Dubey says the then Defence Minister Jagjivan Ram was not given due cred-it for the country’s victory.

What is more, an unsavoury controversy broke out in the wake of the re-moval of a photograph of the Pakistan Army surrendering to India from the Chief of Army Staff’s office. Congress MP from Wayanad took up this issue in the Lok Sabha and sought explanation. There was no immediate response in the House, but a day later the Army clarified that the photograph was not removed, but shifted to the Manekshaw Centre.

Modi’s one social media post on the Vijay Divas, without referring to the contribution of Indira Gandhi, also raised many an eyebrow. Nothing new in this. Even on death anniversaries of Nehru and Indira, Modi would post just one-line messages ‘remembering’ them with no reference to their achieve-ments.

In contrast, please look at what Vajpayee had said when Nehru died:

“In the Ramayana, Maharshi Valmiki has said of Lord Rama that he brought the impossible together. In Panditji’s life, we see a glimpse of what the great poet said. He was a devotee of peace and yet the harbinger of revo-lution, he was a devotee of non-violence but advocated every weapon to de-fend freedom and honour.”

Modi and his team, however, seem to derive pleasure in continuously criti-cising Nehru while disregarding the democratic principles of respecting the opposition.

Cut to Vajpayee who said this about Nehru: “I remember I once saw him very angry during the days of the Chinese aggression when our Western friends were trying to prevail upon us to arrive at some compromise with Pakistan on Kashmir. When he was told we would have to fight on two fronts if there was no compromise on the Kashmir problem, he flared up and said we would fight on both fronts if necessary. He was against negoti-ating under any pressure.”

“He was an advocate of individual freedom and yet was committed to bring-ing about economic equality. He was never afraid of a compromise with an-ybody, but he never compromised with anyone out of fear. His policy to-wards Pakistan and China was a symbol of this unique blend. It had gener-osity as well as firmness.”

Modi must read Vajpayee's tribute to Nehru: “It is unfortunate that this gen-erosity was mistaken for weakness, while some people looked upon his firmness as obstinacy”. The Modi government does not differentiate between election campaign speeches and parliamentary discussions.

Sample this Modi speech on the occasion of the Constitution Adoption Day: “The seeds of constitutional misuse were sown by the first Prime Minister of the country and were later nurtured and watered by another Prime Minister, Mrs Indira Gandhi. The misdeeds initiated by the first Prime Minister cul-minated in further damage. In 1971, a Supreme Court decision was over-turned through a constitutional amendment. This amendment not only nulli-fied the Supreme Court's ruling but also clipped the wings of the judiciary, asserting that Parliament could amend any article of the Constitution with-out judicial review. The rights of the judiciary were systematically curtailed. This grave act was committed in 1971 by the then Prime Minister, Mrs Indi-ra Gandhi, whose government used this amendment to seize fundamental rights and exert control over the judiciary.”

Then he goes on to blast Indira Gandhi: “With no one to hold Mrs Gandhi accountable, when the court invalidated her election for unconstitutional practices, she retaliated by imposing an Emergency to cling to her position. This misuse of constitutional provisions strangled Indian democracy. In 1975, she introduced the 39th amendment, ensuring that elections of the President, Vice President, Prime Minister, and Speaker could not be chal-lenged in court, even retrospectively. This was not merely a shield for future misconduct but also a means to cover past transgressions.”

Then we had Rajnath Singh attacking the Emergency excesses and explain-ing as to how he was jailed. He was not allowed to attend his mother’s last rites, he said.

Did Indira Gandhi not apologise for the Emergency and was she not pun-ished by the people by roundly defeating her Party during the elections. The same people returned her to power after the messy Janata Party government collapsed.

Priyanka shot back saying at Rajnath: “So, why don’t you learn from the Emergency mistakes and apologise for what you are doing!”

There are enough and more examples of Modi era misdeeds which the BJP does not own up, but attacks the Congress for its misrule.

If Indira Gandhi had dismissed elected State governments Hasn’t the BJP formed governments in States by the backdoor? If Indira Gandhi jailed po-litical opponents, isn’t the BJP government harassing, persecuting and jail-ing those who do not toe the ruling party’s line? Doesn’t the BJP misuse the investigation agencies?

Stan Swami, 84, who was charged under UAPA, was jailed, refused bail, and not allowed even a straw to sip water, died in jail. He was a patient of Parkinson’s disease. G N Saibaba, also accused of sedition, died shortly af-ter being released on bail with the courts finding no evidence against him. From Jharkhand CM Hemant Soren to AAP leaders such as Arvind Kejri-wal, the BJP government jailed political opponents with no case to prove in the court.

We have several cases of excesses such as the infamous bulldozer justice and ignoring the over year long crisis and carnage in Manipur about which nei-ther Modi nor his government ever speak. But they keep blaming the Con-gress “misrule” without bothering about their own.

(The columnist is a Mumbai-based author and independent media veteran, running websites and a YouTube channel known for his thought-provoking messaging.)