The Past, Present and Future of India’s Capitol Hill Moment

It is impossible not to draw parallels between the ideology and political strategy of Donald Trump and Narendra Modi, and the latter has expertly used mob-driven events to his advantage.

What happened on January 6 is unprecedented in the history of the United States. The Capitol – meeting place of the US Congress and the seat of the legislative branch of the federal government –  came under direct attack from a violent mob. The police failed miserably in doing their job and the mob stormed the building, temporarily disrupting the process of certifying Joe Biden’s electoral college victory. Some called the attack an attempted ‘coup’ or ‘insurrection’, others termed it a ‘terror’ attack. Nonetheless, the event invoked a sense of horror and surprise for people across the world and proved to be a huge embarrassment for a country that prides itself in being the world’s oldest and arguably most mature democracy.

For Indians, the astonishing part wasn’t what happened but that it happened in the US. That an unruly mob, uncontrolled by the police, ended up breaching a legislative building is something that we can comprehend because unfortunately, India has witnessed many mob-driven events which were much worse in terms of loss of life and property damage.

Looking at the events that led to the storming of the Capitol Hill, one can easily draw parallels between the functioning, ideology and strategic execution of Donald Trump and Narendra Modi or the BJP.

Consider the parallels.

1. The storming of the Capitol began when the defeated president in a speech to a large group of his supporters said that he was ‘robbed’ of the election. He asked them to march to the building where Biden’s win was to be certified and exhorted them to ‘fight’. 

It will be hard to count the number of times senior leaders of the BJP gave similar calls to their supporters. Starting from the demolition of Babri Masjid in 1992 to the Gujarat riots of 2002, to last year’s Delhi riots, speeches made by BJP leaders L.K. Advani, Narendra Modi and Kapil Mishra played as much of a role in the rioting, murder and destruction which followed as Trump’s words did on January 6.

Narendra Modi and L.K. Advani. Photo: Facebook/Narendra Modi

2. After Trump’s speech, his supporters, many of whom were armed and dressed in military attire, stormed the building where federal law-enforcement agencies (controlled by Trump) failed to establish a security cordon. The protesters quickly overwhelmed the police.

A much worse version of police inaction was recorded in Gujarat (during Modi’s tenure as chief minister) during the 2002 riots, when for three days, mobs incited by Sangh parivar leaders essentially had a free run to kill and rape hundreds of Muslims. The Delhi police –  who report to Union home minister and Modi’s trusted Man Friday Amit Shah – behaved similarly during the Delhi riots of February 2020, where instead of acting against the rioters, they were accused of participating in the riots and coordinating with the rioters in assaulting victims.

3. Trump made a public statement to his supporters who attacked the Capitol, in which he asked them to ‘go home’, but added that he ‘loves them‘. His comments were described by some as adding fuel to fire. He has not yet apologised for not being able to gauge the situation and acting in pure and evil self-interest.

Much worse than Trump, BJP leaders have a history of letting rioters have a free pass and not apologising for their missteps. After the 2002 Gujarat riots, Advani said, ‘the issue of an apology does not arise. But it is sure that riots are a sad issue’. When asked about his alleged complicity in the riots, Modi claimed that he would never apologise, but said he should be hanged if there is “even a grain of truth in the allegations”.

Also Read: The Trump Coup D’Etat and Insurrection Was Long in the Making, And Will Continue

As one speculates in horror what such a siege might do to India and its constituents, one should remember that a similar attempt was made on the Indian parliament 55 years ago.

On November 7, 1966, during Indira Gandhi’s regime, a crowd of around 125,000 descended on Central Delhi demanding a nationwide ban on cow slaughter. The mob, composed of saffron-robed sadhus, was armed with swords, trishuls and spears. The sadhus began by laying siege to the surrounding areas of Connaught Place, attacking electrical substations, hospitals, cinema halls, and other establishments.

After reaching Parliament Street, Jana Sangh MP Swami Rameshwaranand made an inflammatory speech, as a result of which the mob went ballistic and attacked the Parliament’s security cordon. A policeman was killed in the melee but before the mob could enter the building, the police opened fire, killing seven sadhus. The defeated mob then turned around to vandalise the Connaught place area even more, along with attacking the houses of the Congress president and a Union minister.

Parliament House. Photo: Reuters

Fourteen years later, the Jana Sangh would evolve into the Bharatiya Janata Party, which in 1996 formed the government at the Centre for the first time. It continued to flourish and became the single largest party under Narendra Modi.

The politics of the BJP and especially Modi, is of having no regrets, contrition or repentance. Amongst his supporters, this has worked like a charm. Modi is yet to lose an election, having succeeded in five. One can only imagine what might ensue when he finally does lose one.

Jaspreet Oberoi is a freelance writer. He tweets at @iJasOberoi.

Why Justin Trudeau Is Supporting Protesting Farmers in India

Along with balancing domestic statecraft, Trudeau also had a score or two to settle with his Indian counterpart, Narendra Modi.

On November 30, while addressing Sikh participants from across Canada, on a Zoom meeting organised to celebrate the birth anniversary of the founder of Sikhism Guru Nanak, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said, “Canada will always be there to defend the right of peaceful protest.” These words were spoken in the context of the physical force being used by the Indian police against protesting farmers, many of them Sikhs, in parts of north India.

It did not take much time for the rebuke to reach India and invoke a plethora of reactions – the Indian government strongly objected to it, calling the comments ill-informed and unwarranted, while for the farmers, especially Sikhs from Punjab, saw it as a shot in the arm. They expressed their gratitude to Justin ‘Singh’ Trudeau, as he is popularly and fondly known. Most of the Indian media condemned Trudeau for ‘interfering in the internal matter of India’.

Making these comments benefits Trudeau and the protesting farmers, but also reflects the realities of  the globalised world.

Sikh political lobbying is a strong force in Canadian politics, which becomes apparent looking at the sheer numbers of public representatives. The current House of Commons has 18 Sikh MPs out of the total 338, making it a decent 5.32% share, compared to India’s 2.39% (13 Sikh MPs out of 543 in Lok Sabha). This sheer numerical logic makes all the three major federal political parties of Canada (Trudeau’s Liberals, the Conservatives and the NDP) sensitive to affairs and sentiments of the Sikh community.

Also read: Narendra Modi Is Learning the Perils of ‘My Way or the Highway’ Governance

Within this population, the most affluent section in Canada are the ‘Jatts’ who also happen to be the dominant within the group leading the current farmer protests in India. Amongst Sikh circles in Canada, calls to condemn the laws and stand in solidarity were out and up on the very first day the protesting farmers faced the Haryana police. Tens of thousands of households in rural Punjab have family members currently settled and thriving in Canada, so when a Canadian Punjabi stands up and states that it is his brother/father/mother who is being subjected to tear gas and water cannons, more often than not he is not being metaphorical.

It may not be widely known in India that days before Trudeau’s comments, chiefs of the other two federal parties – the NDP and the Conservatives – had already made public statements in support of the farmers’ protests, condemning state violence. Trudeau waited till ‘Gurpurab’ and used the wider platform to assuage their feelings while addressing the 300 odd Sikhs representing different organisations.

Along with balancing domestic statecraft, Trudeau also had a score or two to settle with his Indian counterpart, Narendra Modi. Trudeau, a liberal, both in name and functioning, hasn’t got along with Modi’s ideology or working style. In the last six years, they have ended up at crossroads on multiple occasions, especially on the issue of Canada not heeding to India’s demands of suppressing Khalistani voices prevalent in that country.

Nobody has forgotten, certainly not Trudeau it appears, how he and his family were given a cold shoulder by the Indian administration on his trip to India in 2018. Compared to other heads of state who visited India around the same time, his trip was downplayed and he was made to appear way less significant than what the trade and diplomatic relationship between the two countries would otherwise dictate.

Also read: ‘You Can’t Forget Your Soil’: Why Punjabi Artists Are So Embedded in the Farmers’ Protest

It is also almost embarrassingly predictable to see how the Indian government and its allies in the media are deploying the bogey of Khalistan against the protesting farmers, and Trudeau. Because the majority of protesting farmers are Sikhs, because the majority of Indo-Canadian MPs in Trudeau’s government are Sikhs, they want to discount the farmer’s demands and dismiss it as Khalistani propaganda.

In general, Canada during Trudeau’s time and before is known as a voice for world human rights. This started with its central role in drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1947-48 and continues today with it being a party to seven major international human rights conventions. It may interest naysayers to know that Canada has spoken for the Rohingya, and on Chinese human rights abuses in Hong Kong and on the Uighurs. Earlier this year, Trudeau was the only world leader who took ‘the knee’, in defiance to Donald Trump, while supporting the Black Lives Matter movement.

In a globalised world, what Trudeau has done is something that more and more of world leaders will do. He is speaking for his constituents but also for the powerless, wherever they may be.

Jaspreet Oberoi is a freelance writer. He tweets at @iJasOberoi.

Why Did AAP Not Live Up to All the Pre-Election Hype in Punjab?

The party’s campaign was run by enthusiastic volunteers but in the end was no match for the experienced and familiar Amarinder Singh.

AAP’s campaign was run by enthusiastic volunteers but in the end was no match for the experienced and familiar Amarinder Singh.

File photo of the AAP chief Arvind Kejriwal in Punjab. Credit: PTI

File photo of the AAP chief Arvind Kejriwal in Punjab. Credit: PTI

Every Punjabi voter irrespective of the party choice, every journalist who visited Punjab in these last few months, every newspaper’s editorial section and even the opponents of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) in private unanimously expressed a common thought during the election campaign, that AAP would do well in the state. The estimates ranged between 45 to 75 seats and it was felt that the party would be a major player in government formation or even have a shot on its own.

On their part, AAP leaders, aware of this strong perception, were not modest and could often be heard making tall claims, some even declaring they would touch the 100 seats mark in the 117 member assembly. Along with the public mood, they had other more reliable cues to be as confident as they were. Lakhs of Punjabis turned up in the hundreds of rallies that AAP organized in the six-odd months before the elections. That the party had not relied on many of the usual tricks, of distributing liquor, money and other favours to attract the crowd, it made the leaders, the volunteers and the supporters extremely confident of a landslide victory.

The results did not bear out this optimism. The party won just 20 seats, ahead of the Akali Dal but way behind the Congress which got 77. So did something change suddenly? Why did Congress come out victorious in the Punjab battle? What were the factors that destroyed the so-called AAP-wave?

Looking at the constituency-wise polling data, the most obvious conclusion is that AAP performed the worst in the urban centres and Hindu-dominated pockets. This is extremely intriguing because Arvind Kejriwal was the only Hindu leader of a party in the state. To understand this, we need to go back 18 months or so to the time when the AAP-wave started emerging. Sikh groups at the time were up in arms because of the inability of the Akalis to nab the culprits responsible for numerous sacrilegious incidents involving the Guru Granth Sahib. The disenchantment with the government was at its peak and the only one who paid attention to the grievances was Arvind Kejriwal. He came to the Muktsar Maghi Mela and, in to a huge crowd of Sikhs, promised to punish the culprits. That went down very well and the panthic vote, which normally used to sway elections in the favour of the Akalis started moving towards AAP.

This shift continued when AAP began pandering to the affluent NRI Punjabis of Canada, US and rest of the world. The NRIs (mostly Sikhs) not only donated large amounts of money but also came in droves to campaign for the party.  Thousands of Punjabis had left India and sought asylum in different foreign countries during the dark days of militancy.All seemed to be going well for AAP until the strategists in the Congress decided to turn the tables.

After being unsuccessful in attracting any NRI support for these elections, the Congress decided to take its chance and took an anti-NRI stance. In his speeches, the Captain started blaming AAP for using Khalistani money in its campaign and for cozying up to anti-national secessionist forces. This rhetoric went down very well with the Hindus populace, because they have suffered at the hands of Sikh extremists. To add to the fears, just 40 days before the polls, a right-wing Hindu leader was shot dead in Ludhiana by unidentified gunmen and just 4 days before the polls, a blast ripped through a Congress political rally at Maur near Bathinda. Nobody has till date been arrested for any of these two incidents and it seems nobody will ever be.

An outsider might to think of Punjab as a Sikh state, but this would be afaulty assessment at multiple levels. Hindu voters have always been the deciding factor in Punjab elections, be it when they helped Congress of 2002 topple the Akalis or when they sided with BJP-Akali alliance in 2007 and 2012. Within the Sikhs of Punjab, divisions run deep on the lines of caste, urban-rural divide and even occupations. Affluent urban Sikhs, along with the service-class could not come around supporting a risky and unconventional party being run on the ground by young and passionate volunteers. They just could not believe that AAP had it in it to give a stable government. The same slogans in support of Kejriwal and Bhagwant Mann that drew and attracted thousands of rural voters every single day, fell flat in front of this group of people. This was supposed to be the silent voter that could take AAP across the 59 seat mark but on the voting day it spoke up for the tried and tested leadership of Capt Amarinder. AAP did realize this mistake around a month before the polls and even came up with a special manifesto for government employees, but it was too late.

One of the main reasons why AAP could not come across as a stable option was its inability to project a CM-face. This gave the opposing parties a chance to spread numerous conspiracy theories such as AAP’s intention to import a CM from outside the state. For a state known to always elect a Sikh CM, this uncertainty was too much to digest. AAP on the other hand, feared creating factions within the party and thus kept several leaders like Mann, HS Phoolka, Sukhpal Khaira, Kanwar Sandhu and even youngsters like Harjot Bains and Himmat Shergill in fray for the CM’s post. It did not want to pitch the supporters of these leaders against each other by announcing any one name. These leaders belonged to Punjab and given a chance, anyone of them could have, in time, become popular, but with such uncertainty about who it would be, the voters always perceived them as one rung below the Delhi appointed duo of Sanjay Singh and Durgesh Pathak. Punjabis are known to be loving, kind, affectionate and accepting, but they are also known to be people with pride. When Congress and Akalis told the voters again and again about people from UP deciding AAP’s candidates and thus their future, AAP suddenly started to seem to appear as the ‘outsider’ party to the voters. The same voters who had passionately chosen AAP in 2014 Lok Sabha elections now seemed hesitant. Even the well thought out and researched AAP strategy of attacking Akalis on the rampant drug usage in Punjab was projected by the Akali-BJP alliance as a ploy of some outsiders to malign the Punjabi youth.

In ticket distribution, the failure of AAP leadership to placate Navjot Sidhu should be seen as a major factor contributing especially to its dismal performance in the Majha region. On the other hand, promising the CM post to Sidhu would have resulted in Mann and Phoolka turning rogue and thus hurting AAP even more, but in politics, party leaders are expected to be astute and smart enough to manufacture compromises that suit multiple sides and this Kejriwal failed to do. Some of AAP’s potential candidates also suffered from a paucity of funds and they could not garner sufficient donations to run a decent campaign. Tickets were therefore awarded to the next best choice or to the most affluent one, which along with inviting dissent from the party workers also meant weak candidates.

In the end, the AAP waved fizzled out and the Congress emergent triumphant, despite getting 2 percent less votes in comparison to 2012. AAP managed to dent the Akali vote-bank of 2012 and brought it down by almost 10%. It did extremely well in the reserved seats in Malwa and gained some rural Congress vote-share too but the same Congress was able to snatch BJP votes and managed a terrific performance in cities across the state. The BJP came out as the worst performer in these elections with just 3 seats out of the 23 it contested.

Despite this apparent failure, it is to be noted that a four year old party is now the official opposition in the Punjab assembly while the 95-year old Akali Dal has been decimated to the third position. No doubt AAP has a lot to learn from this election, but it should take solace in the fact that its entire campaign was executed on the ground by inexperienced but passionate and hard-working youngsters who almost out-manouvered the Congress.

Jaspreet Oberoi is a freelance writer. He tweets at @iJasOberoi.