Opinion At Dawoodi Bohra event, PM Modi once again proved his bonhomie with the community

From “Mann ki Baat” to “Chai pe Charcha” to “Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas, Sabka Vishwas” — through his brand of electoral communication — Modi has successfully infused democracy and development in his political-communication strategies. However, his mostly indirect messaging emphasising religious pluralism often goes uncommented on in a polarised political environment.

Modi’s brand of messaging may be viewed as a way of creating a popular social image that functions ideologically in a manner that can exert influence by placing certain events into the national consciousness while forgetting others. Nevertheless, Modi’s communication strategy which underlines his commitment towards religious tolerance and unbiased social vision imposes a moral imperative on his core audience, while evidently obliterating an “us vs them” discourse.

While the astounding success of Pathaan is seen as marking the return of megastar Shah Rukh Khan on the big screen, the real message should not be buried in the hype of how much money it has been able to generate or the box office records it has smashed. The success of this movie (in which Khan comfortably plays the role of a Muslim spy, and saves the motherland) needs to be seen as a reliable verdict of a vast segment of India’s younger generation against religious hatred. Pathaan is an action-packed patriotic movie, but Islamophobia is absent in this patriotism. Modi may have sensed this current sentiment much before the release of this movie. During the BJP’s national executive meet last month, he had reportedly instructed the workers and leaders of his party to avoid making unnecessary remarks on irrelevant issues such as movies, because they put the ruling party’s development agenda on the back burner. The prime minister’s comments were viewed against the background of the controversy due to the ‘Besharam Rang’ song in Pathaan. Clearly, Modi has become more willing to demand greater discipline and accountability within his party.

Politics has its unique rules, and political leaders cannot always follow ordinary moral and ethical standards. The best we can hope for in judging the ethics of leaders is that they make good choices when conditions permit it. Modi’s public statements and appearances, consistent with his general style of posing as a benign ruler above the political fray, are adapted to the circumstances at hand and towards the best possible outcome for his party. What is so extraordinary about Modi’s political communication style is that despite his popular image of being a Hindu nationalist, he is not a prisoner of its limitations. While making prolific use of the Hindu nationalist rhetoric for his core political base, Modi is capable of effortlessly switching to the articulation of India’s age-old values of tolerance and co-existence. Even if indirectly, Modi has not avoided urging his support base to rebuild trust and reassurance with India’s Muslim community.

Our current public discourse seems dominated by fundamental political disagreements, grounded in acute forms of identity politics, most of which constitute what it means to be an Indian citizen. In this socio-political milieu driven by what the RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat has termed “new-found aggression in Hindu society”, many Muslim youth are particularly vulnerable to radicalising influences due to the growing perception of marginalisation, and declining social capital of their community.

However, Modi and his national security team are well aware of the pitfalls of radicalisation and violent extremism among Muslim youth. Forcefully arguing that Islamic scholars have an important role in countering radicalisation and extremism by propagating progressive ideas, India’s National Security Advisor (NSA) Ajit Doval, had told a gathering of ulemas from India and Indonesia in November last year that there was no space for hate speech, prejudice, propaganda and violence in a democracy. While underlining Islam’s “peaceful and tolerant underpinnings” in India and Indonesia, he stressed the “need to work together to develop common narratives on de-radicalisation.” Doval also asserted that “extremism and terrorism are against the very meaning of Islam because Islam means peace and well-being” and “we should focus on the real message of our religions, which stand for the values of humanism, peace and understanding.” These should be seen as unmistakable statements reinforcing the narrative that the Modi government is invested in countering radicalisation by reaching out to the Muslim community.

If Modi’s die-hard critics argue that in his electoral speeches, Modi takes ideological shelter under Hindutva, his supporters may also downplay Modi’s call for inclusive politics as it does not advance sound argumentation. This is understandable. Whenever people talk about Modi’s political style they usually refer to the eloquence that goes with his simplification of complex issues and his effective rhetoric in the presentation of certain values, but this one-dimensional assessment overlooks the larger significance of Modi’s means — a mystifying ability to bargain and compromise as he pursues his policies.

Modi continues to demonstrate extraordinary skills in putting across the need to respect religious diversity to his core constituency in both images and rhetoric which often confound his critics. These skills allow him to operate at a higher level in the communication hierarchy while being placed at a higher plane in the power hierarchy. Modi’s communication abilities enhance his ethos as a leader interested in the welfare of all Indians and also commit his audience to a social contract to support him in transforming India.

The writer is Assistant Professor, Department of International Affairs and Security Studies, Sardar Patel University of Police, Security and Criminal Justice, Rajasthan, and a Non-resident Scholar at the Middle East Institute, Washington, DC