Loose canons

The Bharatiya Janata Party has been in power at the Centre for over two years now, and in several of the states for much longer. And, yet, many of its senior leaders act like spoilt sophomoric kids, totally irresponsible, completely out of sync with, in Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee’s pet phrase, the maryada of the authority vested in them. Most of them speak out of turn, and in different voices, pontificating on leading public issues of the day, causing embarrassment and confusion. Take the latest public statement of BJP senior party leader, K.R. Malkani. He has been a party spokesperson in the past, the editor of Motherland, a Jan Sangh mouthpiece. Yet, in a chat with a media organisation, he displayed an abysmal lack of sensitivity when he suggested that Nepal’s accession to India would have been desirable. Undertones of "Akhand Bharat"? He made this provocative remark, completely oblivious to the fact that barely a few days ago five people, including innocent children, had lost theirlives in Nepal over a disparaging remark allegedly made by Bollywood actor Hrithik Roshan.

Malkani claimed that while the Nepalese king during the early ’50s had offered to "accede to India", Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru was only concerned about world opinion and had declined the offer, thereby making a "very serious, very foolish mistake." No evidence was provided for any of these remarks. Although Malkani has now recanted and apologised for his statements, unfortunately the damage has already been done. Two more Hindi-speaking people have been killed in south-central Nepal, and the houses of a minister and two senior ruling Nepali Congress leaders were damaged in bomb explosions. Malkani’s attempt to retrieve the situation by claiming that the statements were his personal opinion is unconvincing. Given his long experience in public life, he should have known that the media was not talking to him in his personal capacity but because he is a senior leader of the party in power.

Malkani is not alone in this new found obsession of Sangh Parivar netas to make public statements. While the Union finance minister points out the virtues of globalisation, the Uttar Pradesh chief minister, Rajnath Singh, rails against beauty pageants since under its garb "our country is being targetted by multinationals", and so on and so forth. Most senior BJP leaders seem to love listening to their own voices, never mind how pedestrian they sound. The party president, Bangaru Laxman, recently claimed that if Pakistan does not stop supporting the activities of the numerous terrorist organisations, than the proposed official talks between the two subcontinental neighbours would simply break down. Laxman’s statements are not outrageous, but what is his locus standi in making such policy pronouncements? He is neither shaping India’s foreign policy, nor is he India’s official negotiator with Pakistan. He should have been more circumspect in making such statements when efforts are on to initiate a dialogue. Whatcan possibly be the compulsion for the party president to speak on behalf of the government other than pressure tactics?