Will this make Advani narrow gap with Sangh: BJP question

The attack served, at least temporarily, to bridge the bitter differences that had marked intra-Parivar ties in recent weeks and shift attention away from Advani’s recent ‘‘ideological deviations’’ reflected in his remarks on Mohammad Ali Jinnah, Akhand Bharat, and the demolition of the Babri Masjid.

Quick to seize the opportunity to reaffirm its commitment to Hindutva, the BJP—joining the RSS and VHP in calling for nationwide protest demonstrations tomorrow—underlined that the attack was not just on a ‘‘bhoutik sthan’’ (material entity) but on ‘‘Hindu aastha’’ (Hindu faith) itself.

Significantly, senior BJP leader Jaswant Singh—regarded as the most ‘‘moderate’’ face of party who stoutly defended Advani’s Jinnah remarks—was fielded to address the press conference this afternoon.

Speaking in Guwahati, Advani too underlined that the Ayodhya site was ‘‘a very sacred place’’ for the people of the country and, therefore, ‘‘the response to the attack over it should also be equally befitting.’’

However, his decision not to go to the site tomorrow despite pressures from colleagues to do so is a reflection of his continuing unease with other figures of the Sangh Parivar, sources said.

‘‘Since the likes of Ashok Singhal and Vinay Katiyar are going to be there, Advani would rather wait and watch than be associated with their rhetoric,’’ sources close to the BJP chief told The Indian Express late tonight.

Advani, however, dispatched senior colleagues Kalyan Singh and Rajnath Singh to Ayodhya today itself and MUrli Manohar Joshi is likely to reach there tomorrow.

The VHP, expectedly, was a the most strident in its response. VHP leaders Praveen Togadia and Ashok Singhal, who were attending the crucial RSS conclave in Surat, blamed the attack on ‘‘Pakistan, jehadi terrorism, and votebank politics.’’

They also held the UPA government’s ‘‘appeasement’’ of Muslims responsible for the ‘‘jehadi’’ attack and demanded that POTA be revived through an ordinance.

Significantly, the BJP too attacked the UPA government’s ‘‘anti-Hindu’’ mindset although Jaswant Singh refused to speculate on the implications of the attack on India-Pakistan ties till the identity of the terrorists was confirmed.

Calling for the resignation of both the union home minister and the Uttar Pradesh home minister for the ‘‘intelligence and security lapses’’ that led to the terrorist strike, Jaswant Singh maintained that apart from ‘‘negligence,’’ the attacks were a result of the ‘‘mindset’’ of the UPA government which disregarded ‘‘Hindu interests, sentiments, and faith.’’

When pointed out that terrorist attacks on Parliament and the Akshardham temple complex had taken place during NDA rule, Singh made the rather astonishing claim that since security of Parliament was the ‘‘responsibility’’ of the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, the then home minister could not be held responsible. As for Akshardham, it did not have the same ‘‘importance’’ as the temple in Ayodhya, Singh said.

He parried questions on how the NDA government’s ‘‘intelligence failure’’ in both the cases was different from the the UPA regime’s alleged failure that led to today’s strike.

For the RSS, which concluded its Surat conclave today, the Ayodhya attack serves as a test case to gauge whether the BJP will abide by its directive to ‘‘ restore the primacy of ideology over personality.’’ The BJP’s invocation of ‘‘Hindu faith’’ today may indicate the party’s return to its roots, but the bulk of the RSS and VHP continue to remain critical of Advani’s ‘‘revisionism,’’ sources said.

VHP leader Acharya Giriraj Kishore, for instance, was dismissive of reports that Advani was going to visit Ayodhya tomorrow. ‘‘Politicians join a movement to make political gains; religious figures do it out of faith,’’ he told reporters today.

Reports from Surat also indicated that several RSS pracharaks were sharply critical of Advani’s statements in Pakistan and the fact that he had not retracted them even after withdrawing his resignation three weeks ago.