Neha
JAMMU, Jan 20: Has BJP taken a U-turn on Article 370? Or, has it abandoned its age-old demand seeking abrogation of this Article? If one goes by what appeared in a section of print media in and outside the state after BJP national president Rajnath Singh's January 18 statement on Article 370, then the answer could be in the affirmative.
What made certain commentators to believe that the BJP has taken a complete U-turn on Article 370 was the Rajnath Singh's January 18 statement that "the party would have 'no objection' to its retention in the Constitution if it has really benefitted the people or developed the state".
A commentator has said: "If Article 370 is good, it should have been stated before. And if it is not good then too it should have been seen before. At this point of time bringing this sensitive issue centre stage shows that the party is trying to kill two birds with one stone; making attempts to embrace the National Conference - the champion of autonomy for Jammu and Kashmir - for it may need allies after the 2014 elections.
Secondly, it is showing its moderate face…There are no clear-cut answers, except that this is some kind of a political expediency…Ek Vidhan, Ek Nishan, Ek Pradhan" (one Constitution, one flag and one head of the state), the swansong of Jana Sangh, the original name of the BJP - has suddenly not only been diluted, but it has also been used in such a manner that the party can resort to a U-turn for political dividends".
So much so, this commentator described the BJP national president's statement on 370 as a "meek surrender to the National Conference".
"Let there be a debate on the issue' - that's the route the BJP has taken to justify its stand, which, of course, is not just a changed one, but a meek surrender to the National Conference. This, easily, could be a ploy to win over allies in the future dispensation after General Election.
The timing of Rajnath's statement, coming close on the heels of its Prime Ministerial candidate Narendra Modi's call for a debate on Article 370 in Jammu last month, is a well calibrated move," he said.
It appears the critics of the latest statement of BJP on Article 370 have not really read it. It is important to note that what Rajnath Singh said while addressing the party's national conclave at Ramlila Maidan, New Delhi, on January 18 was a mere reiteration of what the BJP Prime Ministerial candidate Narendra Modi had said in Jammu on December 1 while addressing "Lalkar Rally".
In other words, he put the ball in the court of the NC and similar other Kashmir-based outfits, besides fake secular organizations, and asked them to justify their stand on Article 370 failing which this Article will have to go and this just can't be interpreted as a U-turn.
That none from the NC or any other fake secular organization has come forward to join the debate proves that the votaries of this atrocious Article have no argument to advance to defend it. And here lies the victory of the BJP. It is now for the NC and similar other pro-Article 370 formations, groups and individuals who have to justify their stand on it.
And there are potent reasons to believe that they would fail to justify their stand. Their failure to justify their stand on Article 370 would only vindicate the BJP's stand that this Article has only harmed the people of the state, hampered the process of integration and enabled only a handful of people to misuse this Article to promote their own personal interests.
The fact is that the BJP has exposed the votaries of Article 370 by giving a new and very positive orientation to the ongoing debate on this Article. It was no wonder then that the BSP, the associations of OBCs, STs, refugees from West Pakistan, minorities including Sikhs and displaced Kashmiri Hindus,, refugees from POJK, to mention only a few, have demanded abrogation of Article 370 saying it is a curse. The most important statement came from a Gujjar intellectual on December 3 and his statement was: "We are not against Article 370 but it is against us". Hence, positive orientation to the debate should not be taken to mean a "meek surrender". |
