
The BJP has accepted Union Food and Consumer Affairs Minister Shanta Kumar8217;s abject written apology for his 8216;outburst8217; a day after the party threatened disciplinary action and, by all official accounts, that chapter is closed. Unofficially speaking, though, l8216;affaire Kumar may not be able to claim such a neat and tidy end. This is so not because of the terrible importance of being Shanta Kumar.
The minister8217;s expression of his pain and disgust 8212; first carried in this paper 8212; at forces that are trying to 8216;8216;destroy the very fabric of the country8217;8217; and at 8216;8216;those counting votes on dead bodies8217;8217;, will return to haunt the BJP for a more compelling reason.
His unburdening had seemed to bear a wider resonance. Post Gujarat, he lent voice to a strain of opinion within his party discomfited by the VHP-Bajrang Dal combine8217;s attempt to hijack the organisation.
He spoke for those in the BJP who wish to distance themselves from the criminal failures of Narendra Modi8217;s partisan government. Post Goa, his remarks will echo unhappily in a party whose bosses have not only stamped their approval on the exertions of the VHP and the Bajrang Dal but also elevated the Gujarat chief minister to the status of Hindutva8217;s new mascot.
The peremptory silencing of Shanta Kumar sends out some extremely unsavoury signals. It disappoints all those who have long insisted that the BJP has matured into a mature, multilayered organisation that accommodates a wide spectrum of opinion 8212; no more the crusading, intolerant monolith it was while it clawed its way to national centrestage.
It is a rebuke to those who pointed to the softening of its edges, the broadening of its constituency, as evidence of this change. The message, now, is clear: the churning must stop. All opinion in the BJP must be dyed in the same violent shade of saffron. There will be no negotiation and little compromise on the party 8216;line8217;.
Inner-party democracy, to the extent that it existed in the BJP, and the willingness to keep different views on board, must take a backseat to the imperative to 8216;revive8217; a previously fixed 8216;identity8217;.
The BJP8217;s outlawing of the moderate is worrying, therefore, to those who believed in the party8217;s ability to spread its wings and embrace a more inclusive programme.
In a larger sense, it is also disturbing for all those who have stakes in this country8217;s plurality. A ruling party that is shrinking into a hard shell is bad news for a country that prides itself on its openness to and encouragement of diversity.
A BJP that decides to address only a single constituency, even one that constitutes a majority, can do damage in a democracy that respects its minorities.
It may yet be that this is an overreading of the predicament of Shanta Kumar. It may be that both l8216;affaire Kumar and the hard talk at Goa speak of a transient phase.
After a string of electoral defeats, the party is under pressure from its allies on Gujarat. It may well be that once the crisis is over, the BJP will realise that a certain fuzziness of identity is a good thing after all.
In a democracy as large and plural as ours, it is pragmatic to take along different opinions. That is the only way it can ever hope to wrest the title of being the natural party of governance it has long coveted.