ONE very articulate
Congress Member of Parliament once called P.V. Narasimha Rao the first BJP
Prime Minister of India. Disclosures by P.V.R.K. Prasad, Narasimha Rao’s
confidant, confirm that. Officially he was Media Adviser and Additional
Secretary to the Prime Minister. Prasad had known Narasimha Rao since 1971 when
he was Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh. He reveals unwittingly why Narasimha
Rao was inactive in the face of the threatened, rather imminent, demolition of
the Babri Masjid on December 6, 1992, and why he was inaccessible while the
crime was being perpetrated. He had no heart to stop it. His heart was set on
constructing a Ram temple ahead of the Bharatiya Janata Party
and thus take the wind out of its sails. When he began to swim with the tide of
popular wrath after the demolition, L.K. Advani, who had formerly called him
“fantastic”, poured on him the vitriol reserved for a turncoat.
Prasad is a man of many
parts. His facts go awry. The Vimadalal Commission of Inquiry against former
Chief Minister J. Vengala Rao and others was not set up by M. Channa Reddy but
by Union Home Minister Charan Singh. He revels in being a go-between. Men like
Amitabh Bachchan, Amar Singh, Lakshmi Mittal, Dhirubhai Ambani and his sons
flit through its pages; particularly Chandraswami. Because of his stint as
Executive Officer of the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams he had come to know
many pundits in many places. Narasimha Rao told him, “You have to do
troubleshooting on my behalf in such matters” (squabbles among officials). Over
time, his confidence grew and with it the role of pundits and the performance
of rituals. Prasad’s faith in them was deep, as Narasimha Rao knew.
“Periodically we organised homams and rituals for his protection. We got a
homam performed before P.V.’s minority government faced a confidence vote in
Parliament. He won the confidence vote. Subsequently, many such experiments
were done. Nobody expected P.V. to last as P.M. even for a year. However, P.V.
emerged as the first Prime Minister outside the Nehru family to last five years
in office.” An interesting job for an Indian Administrative Service officer.
Apparently, Narasimha Rao shared his faith and also his friendship with
Chandraswami.
One might have missed his
revealing memoir but for a report in The Hindu of December 15,
2012, which reads thus: “Former Prime Minister, the late P.V. Narasimha Rao,
wanted the construction of the Ram temple at Ayodhya through an ‘apolitical’
trust and prepared an ‘unshakeable’ master plan. He believed this could be done
by the trust that could enjoy ‘acceptability’ from all corners of the Hindu
religion because it was headed by Sringeri seer Sri Bharati Theertha Swami as
chairman. Narasimha Rao also saw to it that seers of all other important Hindu
Mutts and heads of ‘Gaddis’ in Ayodhya were roped into the trust.
“This was stated by the
former Media Adviser and Additional Secretary to Prime Minister, P.V.R.K.
Prasad, after Sri Bharati Theertha Swami released a book written by him and
titled Wheels Behind the Veil (CMs, PMs and beyond). The Telugu
version was published last year.
“The details of the plan
conceived by Narasimha Rao were revealed by Mr Prasad at ‘Guruvandanam’, a
crowded reception held in honour of [the] Sringeri seer at the Lalitha Kala
Thoranam here…. The former IAS officer said the seer had agreed to head the
trust after much persuasion, around the same time that he observed his
‘Chathurmasa Deeksha’ (four-month-long-worship) in New Delhi.”
The sponsorship of the
launch in 2012 is as revealing as this bit (on page 162) about what was going
on 20 years earlier, in 1992. “I was stunned and worried the moment I heard the
Prime Minister. ‘They insist on constructing the Ram temple at Ayodhya. Do they
own Lord Ram?’ Lost in deep thought, he appeared to be talking aloud, but
within my earshot: ‘Let us do one thing…. A Ram temple shall be built at
Ayodhya. Since they campaign as if we are opposed to it, we will take them head
on by ensuring the temple is constructed in some other manner.’ As he unfolded
the visionary strategy, I was overwhelmed with joy and surprise.” This
was well before December 6, 1992. Narasimha Rao wanted to build the temple
to pre-empt the BJP. This was his overriding concern. Hence his passivity in
the face of the certain threat to the mosque.
The BJP leaders would do
the dirty work of demolition. Narasimha Rao would build the temple on the ruins
of the mosque, robbing them of any credit and tarred rightly with blame for the
demolition.
False excuses
Prasad records that “the
BJP national leaders present on the dais hardly 100 metres away from the
structure did not persuade the kar sevaks to stop demolition. Over and above,
some of the leaders had been shouting encouraging slogans. The State government
was callous and it utterly failed in protecting the structure. There were some
who believe that the State had not deployed the forces near the structure
purposely, in order to facilitate demolition by the kar sevaks. When once the
attack on the structure started, even if the State wanted to take action, they
could not have prevented the demolition without killing thousands of sevaks, as
the reserve forces had to be brought through the frenzied masses of kar sevaks
surrounding the structure.” Prasad, to be sure, faithfully retails Narasimha Rao’s
false excuses which Union Home Secretary Madhav Godbole’s memoirs Unfinished
Innings exposed thoroughly.
Now read what Narasimha
Rao began to do in 1993 after the demolition of the mosque.
“Construction of the Ram temple was the BJP’s immediate agenda in the 1993
elections to the four northern States. Since then, the BJP had been emphasising
temple construction as its primary task in all its publicity campaigns. ‘Does
the BJP own Ram, whom all Hindus worship?’ This political question had been
troubling P.V. P.V. was alone when I called on him as usual on a Sunday. Asking
me to take my seat, he started talking and continued as if talking to himself.
I carefully listened to him. ‘We can fight the BJP. But how can we fight
against Lord Ram? The BJP behaves as if Lord Ram is its property. When we say
the Congress is a secular party, it doesn’t mean we are atheists. Lord Ram is
our God as well. We pray to Him just as they do. How far are they justified in
hoodwinking people by monopolising Lord Ram under the pretext of constructing a
temple at Ayodhya?’”
A representative trust
The plan was disclosed to
Prasad in detail. “‘Maybe, the solution is possible by entrusting Ram temple
construction to a representative and apolitical committee comprising all Hindu
heads of mutts and peethams representing the whole cross-section of Hindus.’
The Prime Minister seemed to be indulging in a soliloquy. Was he aware of my
presence? Just to test, I mildly coughed and asked him who should be its
members ideally.
“Pat came the reply: ‘The
heads of Adwaita, Dwaita and Visishtadwaita Peethams, Sankaracharyas of
Sringeri, Kanchi, Dwaraka, and Puri, Tamilnadu Jiyars and Andhra Jiyyangars,
heads of Vaishnava Mutts all belonging to the Ramanuja tradition in the North,
heads of Udipi and Uttaradi Mutts belonging to the Dwaita tradition, Gurujis of
Vallabhacharya, Gowdiya and Chaitanya traditions, and Mahants of Ayodhya and
other Hindu organisations. If we form a trust with representation to all such
groups and entrust it with the task of constructing the temple, nobody could
call the trust a political body. We can also prevent exploitation of the issue
by any political party. My efforts to bring about an amicable solution between
the Hindus and Muslims had not succeeded. Efforts of the earlier V.P. Singh
government also failed mainly because no fruitful dialogue to find some
amicable settlement is possible between the warring groups. Basically they do
not trust each other. Legal settlement by the courts may not be received
peacefully and might be difficult to implement. This is an emotional and
sentimental issue. As both communities have to live together, they should be
persuaded to find an amicable solution—that may be possible by forming a
representative trust, with a view to bringing both sides to the discussion
table.’”
Secrecy and deceit
Secrecy was of the
essence of the matter and with it deceit. “‘The VHP [Vishwa Hindu Parishad] and
the BJP will oppose the formation of such a trust and pressurise the heads of
mutts not to join it,’ I said. P.V. said, ‘They will definitely exert pressure.
That’s why it should not appear to be an initiative of the Congress party or
government. The heads of mutts should give the impression that they are taking
the initiative on their own. And it should happen without anybody knowing about
it. First, we have to talk to each one of them individually and take their
consent. We must make it abundantly clear that the government will extend its
full support only to such a trust and not to any other existing institutions….
We have also to make it clear that construction of the Ram temple can be taken
up only after the court decides on the case pending before it or when Hindus
and Muslims sit together and arrive at a mutually acceptable decision….
‘The Ram temple construction
committee of the VHP is not fully representative to speak on behalf of all
Hindus. In addition, it is deemed as anti-Muslim. Therefore, it had become a
hindrance for initiating any constructive dialogue. If the government were to
intervene, politics would creep in. So, transcending politics, an attempt
should be made to resolve the issue. The government should give unstinted
support to such an initiative.’
“I said, ‘Sir, your idea
is splendid, if it can be carried out. But who will do it?’ ‘You yourself will
have to do it.’ I was stupefied and stunned! P.M. was thoughtful for a while
and resumed. ‘Yes, you alone have to do it. You have good relations with all
heads of religious mutts and peethams. After all, as Tirumala Tirupati
Devasthanams’ Executive Officer you had close acquaintance with most of them.
Haven’t you developed a street of ‘mutts’ itself in Tirumala by allotting
land?’
“‘Sir, it is true but
most of them belong to South India and only a few come from North India. I do
not have even acquaintance with many of the North Indian mathadhipathis,
mahants and swamijis.’ ‘Don’t worry; I will make appropriate arrangements.’”
Prasad developed qualms.
“Yet, at the back of my mind, the question whether I was sinking into a morass
haunted me. Could I, an IAS official, carry out this apparently apolitical but
actually political mission? Even as I mulled over my dilemma, P.V. came out
with another caveat.
“‘Whatever you do and
whoever you meet should not be publicised. Our involvement—either yours or mine—should
not leak out. We should act as catalysts and facilitators. There is one police
official of the DIG [Deputy Inspector General] rank in Bihar to help you in
North India. He seems to be having wide contacts with swamijis in U.P. [Uttar
Pradesh] and Bihar. He had also been involved in mobilising the swamijis for a
dialogue with Muslims earlier. Arrange to get him. Naresh Chandra who is in
charge of [the] Ayodhya Cell in [the] PMO (Cabinet Secretary earlier) can
organise that. Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Digvijay Singh has good relations
with Dwaraka Sankaracharya and some other heads of Vaishnava mutts in Madhya
Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. I will ask him to help you. Simultaneously, we have
to do something on the Muslims’ front. Our own fellows have done a lot of
damage. In their anxiety and enthusiasm to hurt me, they have hurt the Congress
themselves by poisoning the minds of moderate Muslims. You do not bother about
it. From now on, this is your primary responsibility.’”
Narasimha Rao’s strategy
was “to checkmate the BJP from monopolising Lord Ram”. Prasad, for all his
qualms, executed it enthusiastically as he describes in the book. Chandraswami
helped. “Thus we constituted an apolitical Ram temple construction trust by
associating Adwaita, Dwaita and Visishtadwaita pithadhipathis and heads of
other important mutts. We got the trust formally registered also. Thus the
first phase of forming an apolitical trust, which represents all sections of
Hindu society, was complete. It has no links with any political party. But it
has members acceptable to all political parties.
“The government is ready
to extend total support and cooperation if the committee takes up Ram temple
construction. After the registration of the trust, P.V. said confidently: ‘Ram
temple construction will take place now without any objections and
reservations. On the other (Muslims’) side also, sufficient ground work has
been done. You organise the first meeting of the new trust board.’ By then, we
had come to the end of 1995,” a pre-election year.
Two things deserve to be
noted. First, far from assuaging the hurt sentiments of Muslims, their consent
was taken for granted. Secondly, Narasimha Rao’s memoir Ayodhya: 6
December 1992 (Penguin, 2006) suppresses this sordid affair.
Arjun Singh’s warning
His Cabinet colleague
Arjun Singh’s autobiography publishes the very many letters he wrote to the
Prime Minister warning that the mosque would be demolished; Narasimha Rao could
not be bothered. “Narasimha Rao was under the illusion that his action had
consolidated the support of the Hindus for the Congress party as they were in a
majority in India. A simple illustration of this would confirm his pattern of
thinking. Narasimha Rao asked Ranjeet Singh, a senior Congressman and a former
State-level Minister from Samthar in Uttar Pradesh, as to how many jeeps he was
planning to use for his election campaign. Ranjeet Singh replied that he
planned to employ 40 to 45 jeeps. When he heard this reply, the Prime Minister
told him: ‘You will need only four to five jeeps for succeeding because
the atmosphere for the massive consolidation of votes of Hindus behind the
Congress Party has been prepared.’ What actually happened subsequently in
the 1993 Assembly elections in Uttar Pradesh is a matter of history.”
The
Bahujan Samaj Party and the Samajwadi Party cornered a huge chunk of the votes.
The Congress lost; so did the BJP. Arjun Singh resigned from the Cabinet.
Narasimha Rao had him expelled from the Congress.
No comments:
Post a Comment