The Bharatiya Janata Party is in serious danger of negotiating the biggest crisis in its 25-year history with eyes wide shut. The more its senior leaders affirm unwavering allegiance to the “fundamental tenets” of the party, they only accentuate the appearance of being in denial over choices that have to be made. But these choices cannot be held off for long. The only question is whether they will be made rationally, after candid and thorough debate, or inadvertently, by simply letting the drift of events take the party to a new juncture. For the BJP, the storm set off by its president, L.K. Advani’s visit to Pakistan will only settle when the issues raised by him are clarified. One, what are the limits to extremism that the party is compelled — by electoral circumstance and ideological appraisal — to impose? Two, what are the terms of independence — of policy and action — that it would like to impose in its dealings with the Sangh Parivar?It is in this context that the full transcript of Advani aide Sudheendra Kulkarni’s paper presented at a Sangh meet in Bhopal must be read. BJP leaders of diverse political inclination have dismissed the need for debating his call for moderating the “Hindu movement” as the views of an individual. True. But the party has resolutely delayed the moment of reckoning occasioned by Advani’s resignation and its withdrawal. As long as it continues to procrastinate, to avert a difficult introspection, it must know that every provocation will return the BJP to those two questions. In fact, even in hushing calls for debate the party makes a loud choice. By refusing to follow Advani to the centre ground of Indian politics, the party does not merely hang on to the familiar comfort of the Sangh Parivar’s older consensus. It also makes a statement about itself by rebuffing his articulation for more inclusive, less strident politics.Perhaps, the real question is how urgently the BJP wants to position itself as a modern right-of-centre party. The centre ground in Indian politics is by all evidence expanding. The charged and anxious political currents of the 1990s defined by Mandir and Mandal are fading. Circa 2005, the voter seeks a contest between confident contestants who promise governance on a development-oriented programme. A party that gives the appearance of being fearful of its own larger potential may find itself losing appeal. That, really, should be the factor motivating the BJP to meet, eyes and mind wide open, the challenge shown by Advani.
