Why is the 'Muslim factor' so germane to all political calculations for India? It has been so not merely in recent times but since the very beginning of the republic, when the majority opinion in the Constituent Assembly stood against tampering with the Muslim, or any community's personal laws, pushing the promise of having a uniform civil code into the cold storage of the "Directive Principles of State Policy". Since elections began in post-Independence India in 1952, the 'M vote' has remained a matter of ponderous poll-eve calculation.
On the face of it, the importance of the Muslim factor in India seems disproportionately large. With 14.5 per cent population share, the community is still the main ideological factor that draws political dividing line between political adversaries, notably the biggest among them, the Congress and the BJP. The US has 13.5 per cent black African Americans but the picket fence between the Republicans and the Democrats is not the race issues; it is the conflict of views on how much state intervention in the economy could be within the tolerable limits. In India, however, if one side is 'secular', the rival camp has to be 'communal'. It is not left versus right, or capitalism versus socialism. It is simply secular V communal. This alignment is based on an observed fact that Muslims regard BJP as a threat, if not the threat, and therefore they must vote en bloc to defeat the BJP candidate, or its allies, wherever the contest is. The American blacks also display a herd mentality, but on a much lesser scale than Indian Muslims (it became a bit more visible since Barack Obama joined the poll fray in 2008). Why?
One reason is the spread of Muslims in India, the community accounting for more than 10 per cent of population in as many as 218 of the 542 Lok Sabha constituencies, which is over 40 per cent. In 35 seats, Muslims are 30 per cent or above. On the other hand, they're five per cent or less in 142 seats. Politicians could still have avoided being unduly worried if the non-Muslim population, mostly Hindu, had shown consistent voting preferences. But, unlike the Muslims, the Hindus do not vote collectively. In Uttar Pradesh, the largest state, while the upper caste Hindu is more likely to vote for the BJP or the Congress, the Dalit will religiously press the 'elephant' (symbol of BSP) button, and the Yadav, an OBC, may prefer his traditional choice, the Samajwadi Party. But the Muslim keeps a weather eye for BJP, and votes whoever is likeliest to defeat its candidate. Except Dalits in Uttar Pradesh, there is no other community or caste that votes with half as much single-mindedness as the Muslims. It explains why BJP-led coalitions been in power for six of the 33 years since BJP's formation. The Jan Sangh never tasted power in Delhi except in the brief post-Emergency era under Morarji Desai.
It is a fact that BJP stands to gain if votes are polarised between Muslims and non-Muslims, much the way it happened in parts of India after the Babri demolition in 1992. But Narendra Modi, having been declared BJP's prime ministerial candidate, can it do an encore in the general elections next year? Congress is hoping that BJP will fail to consolidate non-Muslim votes just as it failed to do so in 2004 and 2009. But two things are happening that should make Congress strategists watchful. First, poor governance abilities exhibited by the entire spectrum of 'secular' parties—from Congress to SP, JD(U), Lok Dal and Trinamul Congress—is making the Muslim community apprehensive about its future. The dismal picture of the Indian Muslim's state of existence revealed in the Sachar Committee report in 2006 has changed very little, if at all. In education, employment, health, gender equity, and virtually every social parameter, Muslims are trailing even Dalits, not to speak of caste Hindus. It is this fear, more than anything else, which may be prompting community leaders like Maulana Mahmood Madani, general secretary of Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind, to remind the people that there have been more riots in Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan, states run by secular parties, than Modi's Gujarat. Instead of getting rattled by it, Congress should introspect and take immediate remedial steps to generate more confidence in the community.
That brings us to the second reason why old electoral calculations appear somewhat dated. The parties that are professedly "secular" are proving not disinclined to play a different card if opportunity arises. Take for example, the role of SP in Muzaffarnagar riots. The state police did little to prevent the clashes and the army was called out too late. In nearly 120 communal outbreaks in Uttar Pradesh since SP came to power, the Muslim's experience of Mulayam Yadav & Co is far from positive, while that of non-Muslims is no better. Of course Muslims in the state can shift allegiance to Mayawati and her BSP. But BSP is not spread out widely enough to bridge the gap between defeat and victory in more than 20-22 seats, in a gigantic state of 80 LS constituencies. In West Bengal, Muslims already doubt Mamata Banerjee, the Trinamool chief, for having a covert understanding with BJP. In Bihar, with the JD(U) under Nitish Kumar considerably emaciated by the end of its alliance with BJP, the Muslims may look for old friend Lalu Prasad.
Instead of giving Muslims special rights, and stupid benefits like Imam allowance and Haj subsidies, the government should have given them equality of status. Sachar Committee recommended setting up of, nor is anyone curious to know why Muslim literacy in Gujarat, at 73.5 an Equal Opportunity Commission, and working out ‘Diversity Index’ for jobs, and educational institutions. Nobody talks about it any longer per cent, stands so much higher than the all-India figure of 59.1 per cent. Muslims in India have traditionally suffered from “minority complex”. But the new generation of Muslims may demand equal rights as citizen.
(The author is
National Editor of the
Lokmat group of newspapers in Delhi)
|
