BJP softens on its core issues to deliver new, ‘feel-good Hindutva’

Take first Article 370. In 1998, the BJP had, in its manifesto, reiterated its commitment to abrogate Article 370 which provides for special status to Jammu and Kashmir. This is not the case in the Vision Document released today. There is no talk anywhere of abrogating the Article.

While recognising that the Constitution provides for ‘‘transient and temporary’’ provisions for J&K—it does not even refer to Art 370 by name—it talks instead of the importance of eliminating terrorism and accelerating economic development.

At a time when the Vajpayee-led government has initiated a peace process with Pakistan, which the Vision Document promises to take forward, and Deputy PM LK Advani is talking to the Hurriyat, the move is trowards greater autonomy as a possible solution and not the abrogation of Article 370. In fact, Advani had said in Chandigarh not long ago that this was not the time for abrogating Article 370.

In fact, the BJP has articulated its opposition to the proposal by the J&K government to enact a law depriving Kashmiri women of their inheritance if they marry outside the state, not on grounds of Article 370, as might have happened in the past, but because it is an ‘‘anti-woman’’ provision.

There is also a perceptible shift in the party’s position on the Uniform Civil Code. The Vision Document does not even openly call for a Uniform Civil Code. Instead it states that the Constitution provides for it, the Supreme Court has endorsed it, it is not an issue of any one party, and that the BJP views Uniform Civil Code as an instrument to promote gender equality. More importantly, it says that a ‘‘social and political consensus has to be evolved before its enactment.’’

Again this is so different from the way the party had formulated its commitment to Uniform Civil Code in 1998, the year when the BJP had its own manifesto. In 1999 it had dispensed with it and opted to go in for NDA’s Agenda.

On the Ram temple, the BJP has given up its insistence on the constitutional method as an option of enacting a law in Parliament to facilitate the temple. While reaffirming the party’s commitment to build a Ram temple in Ayodhya, the BJP says it remains committed to honour the verdict of the Court.

And then it goes on to say that a negotiated settlement is the best way of bringing this about. In fact, it talks about the importance of an amicable resolution of the problem through dialogue ‘‘for starting’’ a new chapter in Hindu-Muslim relations.

Contrast this with the 1996 manifesto where the party said it would ‘‘remove all hurdles on the road’’ towards building the temple.

What is significant is that these shifts in the party’s position are contained in the Document which is meant to project the BJP’s vision meant for its core constituency.

The party leaders have already made it amply clear that as far as the BJP is concerned it is going to be bound by the manifesto of the NDA, whether or not it gets a majority on its own. The NDA’s manifesto is expected to be out on April 8.

Of coure, there is mention of Swadeshi, as in the past, but this time in the context of globalisation. There is also reference to Hindutva as an inclusive ideology, for a central law on cow slaughter ban, provided there is a consensus on it.

The document has pictures on the last page of all the leaders who are ‘‘sources of our inspiration.’’ The pantheon comprises Mahatma Gandhi, B R Ambedkar, Jayaprakash Narayan, Shyama Prasad Mookerji, and Deen Dayal Upadhyaya.