Narendra Modi, the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) prime ministerial face for the upcoming general election in India has started pouring his heart out on foreign policy issues in mega rallies held across the country. Unfortunately, the more he speaks, the more he reinforces his hawkish nature and predatory worldview.
Modi’s continued rigidity on Pakistan, China, Bangladesh and even Sri Lanka has only bolstered the popular apprehension that this Hindutva mascot will be pursuing a rabid confrontationist policy toward these immediate neighbors of India if he is elected to the top post. True to his nature, Modi is busy milking the latent stubbornness existing within a section of India’s vocal social media savvy populace who wants nothing less than a head-on confrontation with Islamabad and Beijing simultaneously, whatever the consequences.
That the BJP too wants to project Modi as a dogmatic leader when it comes to the question of teaching bête noir Pakistan a hard lesson or two can be ascertained from party leader Rajiv Pratap Rudy’s assertion that India has no alternative other than installing Modi as prime minister to batter Pakistan. Worst still, with an eye to incite visceral anger, Modi is purposefully directing his audience’s attention to intermittent Sino-Indian border skirmishes apart from a done to death posturing on Pakistan and cross border terrorism. Clearly, the country is poised to take a sharp militaristic turn under an authoritarian leader who cares little about peace dividends and thinks more about business profit. Fears are that the western military-industrial establishments, especially the Americans, might be waiting in the wings to make good use of Modi’s anti-Muslim bigotry for destabilizing South Asia.
As the US administration is mulling a huge cut on future defense spending, American weapons manufacturers are reportedly seeking greener pastures in the volatile Indian subcontinent. Speculations are rife that the real objective of US Ambassador Nancy Powell’s meeting with Modi at this crucial juncture was to test his amenability. Why else would a high ranking diplomat rush to seek an appointment with an individual who has been denied the permission to set foot on American soil based on the stringent provisions of International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 and who continues to treat minorities as a pariah?
Undoubtedly, India under Modi will be more overt and unapologetic in her expansionist designs. In fact, the arms lobby cannot be faulted for assuming that under Modi India will be priming up for a more strident anti-minority stand, resulting in spillover of tension into the neighborhood. From whatever little can be extracted from the BJP prime ministerial candidate’s crass rhetorical grandstanding, it is evident that he is loath to surrender his Hindu strongman image anytime soon. Those who equate an essentially peacenik Atal Bihari Vajpayee with a cunning Modi to dream of a repetition of Indo-Pak bonhomie witnessed during Vajpayee’s tenure temporarily, are actually living in a fool’s paradise.
A minute study of the basic components of Modi’s political philosophy will reveal a dark agenda that seeks to aggressively reorient the Indian state in line with the Hindutva scheme of pampering to majority extremism. It also envisages a complete overhaul of the very idea of India, which is based on cultural and religious pluralism, so that the country’s majority community (read radical Hindus) can effectively prevent Muslims and other minorities from becoming more assertive. Most importantly, this agenda encompasses a vile objective of recreating the bitterness of partition days of 1947 when the Indian subcontinent was divided both physically and mentally.
In fact, Modi’s persistent prejudice against Muslims is best reflected in BJP President Rajnath Singh’s recent sensational somersault on the question of apologizing for the loss of precious lives in the 2002 Gujarat pogrom under Modi’s reign. Modi, to every sane Indian’s bewilderment, is presenting himself as a messiah capable of dominating what the BJP believes to be India’s troublesome neighbors. He is already being seen as a leader who will tame Pakistan by ordering devastating tit-for-tat sabotage missions deep inside the western neighbor’s territory. Only Modi can inspire fear in Pakistani psyche, as the Indian Army under Modi’s regime will have the liberty of conflict escalation, claims his supporters. To the Tamils, Modi comes across as a man who will put the fear of God into the Sri Lankan leadership. Modi, they are convinced, have the guts to intervene militarily — ignoring international pressure — to rescue detained fishermen and even snatch the controversial island of Katchatheevu from Lankan possession. Also, a segment of radical Hindus in India, understandably, have full faith in Modi for his ability to scare the wits out of Bangladesh’s leadership, who they think are responsible for the plight of the minority Hindu population residing in that country. And Modi is happily playing to the gallery at the cost of sending out wrong signals to the regional leadership despite the urgent necessity of engaging with all of them to preserve peace and tranquility in South Asia and beyond. Apparently, a rampaging Modi does not recognize the importance of peacefully sorting out critical bilateral issues like Kashmir with Pakistan and river water sharing and swapping of territories with Bangladesh. Neither is he in favor of pursuing the Chinese leadership to maximize India’s gain instead of being a third country’s leverage against Beijing. Does such a hawkish leadership serve the Americans and Europeans in good stead even though war is no longer the determinant of power, prestige and global recognition? The answer lies hidden in the womb of time.
