Sanjaya Baru writes: The importance of Mohan Bhagwat

Rashiduddin Khan’s hypothesis was it is Brahmins and Muslims (till Partition) that, as pan-Indian communities, had become instruments of sub-continental unification. Quite understandably, therefore, the ideologues of RSS who sought to unite a post-colonial India were all Brahmins. It was perhaps not an accident that the first BJP Prime Minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee was a Brahmin. A similar thinking may well have also prompted Mahatma Gandhi to name a Kashmiri Pandit settled in the Hindi heartland, Jawaharlal Nehru, as India’s first Prime Minister.

Narendra Modi has tried to widen his support base both by exploiting caste divisions, projecting himself as a backward caste politician, and communal divisions, targeting Muslims in his campaign speeches. The RSS, on the other hand, not only emphasises Hindu unity but also seeks to win over minority communities based on its concepts of Hinduva and Bharatiyata, wherein minorities are reminded of the Hindu roots of their ancestors. This emphasis on national unity, within the framework of its own, albeit questionable, ideology may well explain the recent remarks of RSS Sarsanghchalak Mohan Bhagwat.

Bhagwat’s key message was that in the pursuit of political power responsible national leaders must eschew divisive slogans and agendas and that while democratic contestation is between contending parties, they remain two sides of the same national coin. “Our tradition is of evolving consensus”, Bhagwat said. “That is why Parliament has two sides so that both sides of any issue are considered. But the dignity, the values of our culture should have been maintained. The election campaign was devoid of dignity. It made the atmosphere vicious. Technology was used to spread fake propaganda and false narratives. Is this our culture?”

Bhagwat’s remarks, that should have been made at least five years ago, were most certainly a rap on Modi’s knuckles. Over the past five years, many in the RSS have been increasingly worried about Modi’s divisive and self-serving politics. Modi may have hoped to liberate himself from the RSS by creating a pan-Indian political base of his own, a “Modi-ka-parivar”, but it was based on self-interest, a personality cult carefully constructed and the aggrandisement of power and privilege. BJP ministers were not only becoming increasingly arrogant and distant from their own supporters but had become corrupt and slaves to a personality cult.

As I had observed in my book India’s Power Elite: Caste, Class and a Cultural Revolution (2021), Modi, like Mao Zedong, has promoted a personality cult, with a loyal media in tow, seeking to become larger than his party. Bhagwat has reminded Modi that he is just another member of the Sangh Parivar. That the idea of a “Modi-ka-parivar”, a suffix that even senior ministers shamelessly added to their social media identity, is repugnant. The Sangh Parivar serves the nation. Modi ka parivar merely serves Modi.

In his brief, well-timed statement Bhagwat sought to salvage the reputation of RSS, distancing itself from a damaged BJP leadership. In doing so, he has risen above Modi, placing himself on the higher pedestal of national unity. Bhagwat has done this at a time when India and the world are examining the policy and political implications of Modi’s wounded persona.

It may be recalled that even Vajpayee tried to walk out of the RSS shadow. He never had a friendly equation with the then RSS chief KS Sudarshan. But Vajpayee was able to rise above Sudarshan through the sheer magnetism of his amiable personality and his inclusive politics. While the RSS may have hurt him politically in the end, withdrawing its support in the 2004 elections, Vajpayee remained a figure of national unity.

If Modi had emerged as a figure of unity rather than of hate and exaggerated ego he may have been able to avoid the ignominy of being ticked off publicly by Bhagwat. The BJP’s defeat in Ayodhya and the Ramjanmabhoomi heartland and Modi’s own weak performance in Kashi, the sacred seat of Hinduism, suggest that there has been an internal disquiet within the Sangh Parivar.

Political analysts looking for explanations for Modi’s poor performance have listed out many factors and each one of them played its part. From Rahul Gandhi’s Bharat Jodo Yatra to the Samajwadi Party-Congress Party alliance, to regional sentiments overpowering national appeal and so on. It is also clear that Modi has been cut to size by his own party and the RSS.

While the Jana Sangh and the BJP have been creations of the RSS, the latter has from time to time distanced itself from the former and even lent support to other political parties. This it has done based on its self-image as an organisation that seeks national unity rather than just political power. Political power, for RSS, is the means not an end. For Modi it had become an end in itself.