The Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) election manifesto for the ongoing parliamentary elections clearly highlights its flawed reading of the Indian sociopolitical pulse. The party’s decision to “explore all possibilities within the framework of Constitution to facilitate construction of Ram temple in Ayodhya” (Uttar Pradesh) exposes its intentions to add religious or to be more precise communal color to the otherwise secular country if it reaches the echelons of power.

BJP leaders have apparently lost track of the ground reality that this is 2014 not 1980s. Three decades ago, communication had not reached its peak in India. Television, in black and white, during that period played a major role in creating a strong impact on people’s psychology. Thus when the only channel, the government-controlled Doordarshan, telecast a serial based on Hindu epic Ramayana, for the majority of Hindu viewers, watching it was a religious exercise. Many actually revered actors playing role in that serial as if they were the actual religious figures.

The specific mention of the controversial Ayodhya issue in its election manifesto means that the BJP is once again trying to make electoral gains by playing the communal card. BJP’s decision to fall back on this card shows that either it is no longer very optimistic about its prime ministerial candidate Narendra Modi’s performance in the polls or Modi is not satisfied with the rosy picture emerging from opinion polls and political commentaries.

Definitely, BJP leaders are entitled to be as religious as they desire to be. But there is a difference between their being religious and their use of religion with extremely communal overtones for political mileage. How can it be forgotten that when Babri Masjid in Ayodhya was demolished by the BJP and Saffron brigade members, on Dec. 6, 1992, communal riots targeting Muslims occurred in most parts of the country. That was the time when the BJP stoked communal strife to further its Hindutva agenda and emerged as a prominent political party. Communal designs, marked by major riots, earned BJP the label of a Hindu-extremist party and a terrorist group in international media.

Politically and socially, the BJP has certainly erred in falling back on using the Hindutva card. Observers are now having doubts about this party and Modi’s “secular” aims. In three decades, communication revolution in India has had a very strong impact on a common Indian’s mindset. Today, a common Indian is not easily aroused by such demagogues, as he is well aware that riots can prove to be damaging to his own professional and economic pursuits.

Had the 2002 Gujarat carnage not occurred, the BJP-led coalition might not have been thrown out of power in 2004 elections. As majority of Indians did not want such episodes repeated in other parts of the country, they voted against the BJP and helped Congress return to power in 2004. Considering that Muslims constitute less than 20 percent of country’s population, their vote alone could not have pushed the BJP-led government out of power. India would not have been a secular country if the majority of Hindus entertained extremist and anti-Muslim communal designs.

Even in the demolition of Babri Masjid, less than a percent of the country’s Hindu population participated. From this angle, the international media erred then in labeling Hindus as communal and/or terrorists. Similarly, by highlighting a disputed, communal issue in its election manifesto, BJP cannot claim to speak for the entire Hindu community. Even if polls favor the BJP, the party will have put its communal agenda on the backburner to succeed in forming a coalition government.

- Nilofar Suhrawardy is an Indian freelance journalist who has written extensively for national newspapers.

Email: [email protected]