Had there been no Jawaharlal Nehru, where would the Modi government find its own litany of excuses to hide behind the avalanche of their own omissions and commissions? In fact, the tendency of BJP and Modi government to hide their own skeletons by simply magnifying the failures of Jawaharlal and correspondingly minusculing its own. The Modi government and BJP should note that Nehru is already past its expiry date, especially in the context of its being a new century and a new era. Hence, sooner Modi government realises that hiding behind Nehru’s failures, and miniaturising his own litany of serious governance deficiencies vis a vis magnifying the failures of Jawaharlal, completely ceased to resonate with the vast masses of the people, for the electorate in India had not voted Modi to hide behind Jawaharlal’s failures, but to set them right wherever he could and chart his own trajectory that would lead India to its rightful place in the committee of the nations.
Vivekanand Jha,Ranchi. Let me confess at the outset that the writing of this piece is my expression of sheer disgust brought about the incumbent government comparing each of their actions and omissions vis a vis that of the regime of the first prime minister of India, Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru. Unequivocally, the current scenario of stand -off in Ladakh, at Galwan Valley and Pangong Tsu and other front, between Indian Army and PLA,( People’s Liberation Army of China) even though the process of disengagement has begun, nonetheless remains a serious concern, especially in the context of Pangong Tsu where the Chinese have built up the sufficient infrastructure and hitherto have refused to budge from its existing standpoint–claiming the place as part of its own territory, and not prepared to cede an inch of the strategic flashpoint to India. Seemingly, while Ajit Doval had called up the Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, to discuss the process of disengagement, whereupon, as it has been highly trumpeted in the press, the process of disengagement at Galwan valley had picked up–where both soldiers have taken backsteps by 1,5 to 2 kilometers. Interestingly, while both the emissaries overwhelmingly discussed the Galwan valley, almost for two hours, surprisingly, if not ironically, the issue of Pangong Tsu was blacked out, why? It was contended that once the process of disengagement at Galwan Valley picks up the momentum, Pangong Tsu will be taken up for its peaceful resolution. Significantly. it is well known fact now that Chinese soldiers, after having been well entrenched in Pangong Tsu, which is a strategic flashpoint, keeping in view the Chinese quick access to Aksai Chin and its CPEC( Chinese -Pakistan Economic Corridor) in Azad Kashmir, it will be well nigh impossible for Indian soldiers to liberate Pangong Tsu from Chinese clutch, unless of course China relents or is subjected to some other strategic pressure which almost seems improbable at this juncture.
Incidentally, China, time and again, has been habituated in its master plan of ‘Salami slice’ which implies nibbling the foreign territory by its policy of snake and ladder. Thus following this principle of ‘Salami slice’, China had nibled Indian territories in the past, beginning with the war of 1962 when India had lost its significant territory to the dragons in the wake of India’s ignominious defeat. Regrettably, notwithstanding what today’s Hindu nationalists would like to blame China for the aggression, the reality is too biting to confess: Far from China being a jingoist then, it was Jawaharlal Nehru’s ‘Forwad Policy’ that resulted in India exhibiting its courage to attack China and snatch the Aksai Chin which was gifted to China by its ally Pakistan, which India. legitimately so, perceived its own territory unlawfully occupied by China. But then Jawaharlal Nehru was personally not responsible for the debacle; in fact, it was the entire nation that had gone berserk then, baying for the Chinese blood. Jawaharlal Nehru, to his utmost credit, had taken an opposite stand when he had expressed his serious disagreement on the national consensus being built around attacking China and forcibly grabbing Aksai Chin. Plausibly, Nehru had mirthfully contended in the parliament that Aksai Chin could not even boast for possessing greenery in relation to the the total number of hair that adorned his head–Nehru was insinuating the barrenness of the Aksai Chin and its overall lack of strategic importance to India. Yet, Nehru fell for the national opinion that rooted for India to claim back its Aksai Chin, viewed as an inalienable part of Kashmir. Even Krisna Menon, the then Defence Minister, was excoriated by the coterie of Jawaharlal who thought him as the friend of Russia and consequently was sabotaging the prospect of an impending war against China to claim back the territory. No wonder then with India decimated in the war of 1962, it was Krishna Menon who had to pay the price of his own reluctance to go for war and had to be made a scape goat for Pundit Nehru.
India in 1962 was different. A poor nation that attained independence from a colonial power, had many issues confronting the republic. Jawaharlal Nehru, unequivocally a statesman Prime Minister had staked nation’s military advancement a the altar of his firm conviction of ‘Asian solidarity’ and consequently invested heavily on his relationship with asian neighbour. Hindi- Chini Bhai- Bhai was the consequential output of the doctrine of Panchsheel that was innovated by Jawaharlal with a statesmanship vision that, despite its fiasco, still continues to be the foundation stone for the peace and tranquility of the nations geographically intertwined as neighbours. Further, given Jawaharlal Nehru’s avowed devotion to his motherland, he, after realising his blunder in pinning faith in the good sense of his neighbour, fell terribly ill which resulted in his death. Jawaharlal Nehru’s commitment towards Mother India was irrevocably sacrosanct and, therefore, notwithstanding the fiasco of India’s defeat in 1962, the people of India continued to revere him as the statesman prime minister whose commitment to his people and the nation was unimpeachable. Small wonder then despite the political differences, the role of Jawaharlal Nehru, even though not plausible at times, on several issues, none of his predecessors, including the erstwhile Prime Minister of BJP, Atal Bihari Vajpayee ever blasted Nehru for the various omissions and commissions afflicting the polity during his tenure. On the other hand Vajpayee went on lavishing his praise on Jawaharlal for being a democrat par excellence–Jawaharlal Nehru was the only prime minister India had seen who dared to bite the bullet to convene the special session of Parliament when the war was raging against China and, that too, on the request from such a young MP’s like Atal Bihari Vajpayee then.
With the passage of several decades since the expiry of Jawaharlal Nehru, it is once again the name of Jawaharlal Nehru is ubiquitous yet again, albeit for the wrong reasons: The metamorphosis of Jawaharlal Nehru as Modi government’s and Sangh Parivar’s favourite whipping boy. It is an open secret that Jawaharlal Nehru was never in the good book of Sangh for showing an outright audacity for banning it, yet the ironical part of the whole saga is this: While Sardar Patel, the actual culprit for banning Sangh as the co- conspirator of killing Mahatma Gandhi, is being increasingly courted—The Statue of Unity is the vindication for the same–poor Jawaharlal finds himself at the receiving end for being the representative of the dynasty that had ruled the nation for decades. Worse still, invoking Nehru for every single omission and commision, tantamounts to stumbling upon an easy target behind whom the current regime of Narendra Modi can hide for all its omissions and commissions. For instance, citing Nehru’s blunder for the current procrastination of the government that resulted in the Chinese occupying Galwan valley and Pangong Tsu and other parts of Ladakh, is like hoodwinking the nation for the serious breach of government’s own responsibility in guarding the nation’s border and protecting its sovereignty from being severely assailed by the jingoist nation. Regrettably, when Doklam stand -off itself was the big blow to Modi’s extending olive branch to Xi Jinping, it is beyond the normal comprehension that why Modi had gone overboard in courting Jinping? Worse still, far from resolutely contesting the Cinese claim over Pangong Tsu and even at Galwan valley, BJP spokespersons are engaged in the game of snake and ladder with their Congress counterpart—instead of China being the centre focus, the debate is sought to be given a colour of Nehru versus Modi, and how much land Nehru had conceded to Chinese and how less Modi had even if India loses its territory to China through Salami slicing. Reprehensible enough, BJP today seeks to hide behind the excuse of Nehru’s omissions and commissions for hiding its own colossal failures. These rambling BJP spokespersons should know that Nehru’s India was the impoverished one while that of India under Modi claims to be in the race for superpower. Should a country which so effusively seeks a recourse to projecting itself as a growing power, continue to lose its own territory by way of Salami slicing to its own neighbour? Will it, then, retain any substance in its claim of being a potential power to claim its stake as the permanent member of the United Nation?
It is the most opportune time that the Modi government should look beyond its favourite whipping boy, Jawaharlal Nehru for hiding its own omissions and commissions. Just to quote Nehru’s ignominy for preventing the tumbling of skeletons from its own cupboard cannot be the long term solution for the incumbent regime to skip the public accountability. For the situation that prevailed when Jawaharlal presided over the republic and today when Modi rules the roost, is absolutely in contrast to each other. Moreover, Modi had never cited Nehru’s blunder for his own embarking the power citadel; he, in fact, had only highlighted the decade of Sonia- Mahmohan misrule for seeking mandate from the people of India. Also, his bragging of 56 Inch chest that taught Pakistan a befitting lesson, mysteriously never sought any comparison with any of his predecessors. However, the current miserable failure in tackling the recalcitrant neighbour, has suddenly brought Nehru on the forefront because the Modi government now strives to hide behind someone. And that someone could be none but the first Prime Minister of India, Pundit Jawaharlal Nehru whose blatant failure in1962 war comes handy for Modi to take refuge behind him. Ironically, while BJP perceives Nehru’s abysmal failures in Kashmir and Chinese war, it has ostensibly failed to look into the positivity of the statesmanship of Jawahrlal Nehru which its own first Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee had described in such a glowing terms when he had dubbed the first Prime Minister of India as the Modern Ram. Significantly, Modi government’s blaming of Nehru for soft- pedaling its own dereliction of responsibility cannot resonate with the people of India who do not appreciate, far less encourage, the current regime from exhuming the dead from the burial place and parade him as the villain of India’s current turmoil. Let the good sense prevail in Modi, BJP and in the larger Sangh Parivar that to continue to treat Jawaharlal Nehru as their favouriite whipping boy has an inevitable diminshing return to follow, and it has already begun producing a law of diminishing return for the Sangh Parivar to target giant Nehru as the villain of the republic. It is the time they should emerge out of their Nehru obsession.
