The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) had, as most polls have predicted, raced to victory in the state of Gujarat — leading on a vast majority of the provincial assembly’s 182 seats as results from that crucial electoral exercise began to pour in. Most significant of all is the ‘hat-trick’ recorded by Chief Minister Narendra Modi, who has claimed his seat in his home constituency of Mani Nagar with a whopping margin of some 56,000 votes. According to the BJP, Modi’s third term as chief minister makes him a prime candidate to take to post of future prime minister — when, as the party predicts — it wins India’s next general election due in 2014.
The results from Gujarat and Modi’s own win are being seen as a first suggestion of what may happen about a year down the line. Modi is confident his party will fare well in other states as well and certainly, a string of recent by-poll results for the Congress have not been encouraging. Whether things can turn around is yet to be seen in the volatile world of India’s politics where small factors can trigger big changes. It is, of course, far too early to say what will happen when polling time at the national level comes around.
But what Modi’s convincing victory does tell us is that communal politics and all that they stand for are alive and well in ‘secular’ India. It is clear that despite the terrible part played by his party in riots directed against Muslims in Gujarat in the past — and his own controversial stance on such affairs — Modi retains a huge following.
This is clearly alarming. It suggests that more than six decades after the violent events of the Partition, India has not been able to create the communal harmony that Jawaharlal Nehru had dreamed of and written so eloquently about in his many pieces of writing. Gujarat is clearly still a long way from this vision. So, too, perhaps, is the rest of India with Modi representing all that is dangerous about a nation where many tensions between communities still live on.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 21st, 2012.
COMMENTS (46)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
People of Pakistan and, particularly, the author of this ridiculous editorial about "communalism" in India: It's a bitter irony that you should point fingers at others when your own backyard has so much rubbish in the form of Islamo-Mania that allows you to kill minorities (Hindus, Christians, etc.), destroy their places of worship, and generally let your law-and-order organs tolerate the persecution of minorities because "they have to be persecuted" since they live in a "very modern, tolerant and hospitable" Pakistan where only Muslims can exist. Isn't that a piece of stone-age crap on the part of cave-dwellers who even call themselves "democratic"? Do you Pakistanis know how ridiculous you sound when you call others "communal"? By the way, none of the Pakistani papers reported today about an incident involving the slaughter of a mentally deranged Muslim man in Pakistan for "insulting" the Koran. I ask myself why the media, which plays a watchdog role in a democratic society, not report such incidents. Or is it that the media is run by some goons in politics or, worse still, by your mullahs? I suggest you check out the link below but also read the outrage felt by readers worldwide over this incident. The comments of the readers will be found below the story: http://news.yahoo.com/mob-pakistan-kills-man-accused-burning-quran-074301668.html
@Dee Cee: You say : "It is the symptoms of hate (Modi, the 3D Hindu hriday what not) and ignorance (Swaraj with the song), that I oppose." and you also say "BJP would do well to junk a hatemonger (staunch Hindutvavadis like Advani never fared well) and look for somebody like Sushma Swaraj, who can counter Sonia and Rahul well."
So what is your real opinion about Sushma?
You say "Gujarat is communally divided and hence Modi won. He could bring a trillion dollars, make amazing highways, but he will still be inimical to the spirit of Gandhi and Nehru. More bridges mean ZILCH if India is not secular" and you also say "I have never argued that Congress is is not communal."
So if you agree Congress is is communal and it is in power, then we have a party which is neither building bridges nor is secular. Why then is Modi who is supposedly communal but at least builds bridges not a better option? My definition of secular is anyone who swears by the constitution and implements laws fairly between people of all faiths and castes. But your definition of secular is a party during whose rule no riots should have occurred. And also according to you only a secular party can come to power, so who in your opinion can come to power?
You continue to call Modi hateful even though there have been no riots in Gujart in the last 10 years and in 9 out of 14 seats where Muslims had a sizable voting percentage, BJP won, so why do you say that BJP won due to a divisive vote? You ARE entitled to have your own opinion but you are not entitled to your own facts.
Also he explained why the riots happened , he did not justify them HAd he justified them, riots would have recurred after Akshardham temple episode in October 2002 wher e50 devotees were killed in the temple.
(1)Modi is not a nice man to know but I am clear about the reason for that.He is not a professional rioter. He is a political profiteer of riot. That does not make him unique. Modi did not start the riot. He killed none, nor is there any evidence that he ordered any direct killing. He delayed rescue of the besieged.. Per Babu Bajarangi he gave a free hand to his gang. Due to long history of riots every Cop in Gujarat is well trained to handle riot situations provided he is allowed to work. Modi efficiently ensured inefficiency. That makes him unique. He looked the other way & so did some of his cops for full 48 hours. His ministers (one of them sentenced for 28 years) choreographed the danse macabre. (2) Modi's real crime can not be recognised under IPC. And that crime is: he actively, with malicious intentions, prevented for over a decade the normal & natural instinct of Gujaratis for Reconciliation (called "Maandwal" in colloquial & "Samadhaan" in formal,Gujarati) which is the very genius of those wonderful people, by keeping up the shrill anti-Muslim rhetoric & propaganda directly,& through his minions.(3) Many may not know that the three political parties that fought Gujarat elections were all headed by men trained by the Hindutva outfit RSS. (Modi,Vaghela & Patel) If Modi had lost Congress would have made it & its Gujarat unit is mentored by an equally hard-core fanatic, Vaghela..Therefore Gujarat would have continued to be a Hindutva ruled, non-secular state irrespective of who won. It is a Hindu State, period. No party will ever win there in foreseeable future based on any "Secular" platform.
@Dee Cee: i think as a islamic state , pakistan has no right to speak about communalism, in fact, pakistan should not have democratic process,they should have shariat laws, it is very good, in india also as muslims have personal laws, they must have shariat laws, good laws,every muslims in the world should have shariat laws,if some culprits do some crime then democratic laws through court, if someone wants to enjoy life(marriage) then there will be personal laws,go through past of pakistan,exploiters, dictators,hardcore fundamentalists comes in the power, so, first see that my home is ok
@gp65: "Modi did not justify the riots in 2002 unlike Rajiv Gandhi who did just that in 1984. So who is communal?" Modi justified the riots with Newton's Law. I have never argued that Congress is is not communal. And I have never argued that BJP should be opposed. It is the symptoms of hate (Modi, the 3D Hindu hriday what not) and ignorance (Swaraj with the song), that I oppose. Me not joining the debate is a function of the moderators' preferences. This comment might not get published either. Who BJP chooses as its PM candidate is their matter, I was just pointing out the obvious lack of appeal of Modi even among NDA constituents like Nitish, who was even embarrassed to be seen shaking hands with Modi. Yes he got a lot of seats, but so had Hitler and Congress (which has more seats than BJP now). So the number of seats mean nothing to morality, and yes, his appeal has diminished (one may want to blind to numbers as well). I understand you are uncomfortable with the electoral logic of states, a part of my argument that you completely avoided, and also the issue with the conflict with secular ideals. That may not matter to many, but thank god it mattered to Gandhi and Nehru who kept our India together. The butcher of Gujarat will be contained in Gujarat. Only people like Vajpayee, a loved figure who you have carefully ignored, can lead BJP to power. As for my staying in the country, I see that Modi's supporters will break the country up so easily by forcing people to be displaced. Even so educated and polite a person like you want Indians (and a Hindu like me) to leave. No wonder if Modi comes to power, it will be Karachi all over India, with ordinary people like us being pushed out or killed.
@gp65: I cannot agree with anymore. This is hypocrisy among so called muslims who will not talk about murderous mayhem in their islamic societies but will rather shamelessly demand secularism from nations that are already secular is terribly pathetic state of mind. This inability to keep religious mindset out of social life is what makes such nations one of most backward societies. Poverty of society is in mind not in buying power!! These guys are more worried about Modi while OBL was relaxing in islamabad and Taliban has taken over 50% of the country.
Pakistan itself is creation of communal politics that believes Hindus and Muslims can not live together. Why blame others
@Dee Cee: "BJP would do well to junk a hatemonger (staunch Hindutvavadis like Advani never fared well) and look for somebody like Sushma Swaraj, who can counter Sonia and Rahul well"
There have been no riots in Gujarat in the last 10 years. Nor was the election fought on communal lines. Your basis for calling Modi a hatemonger when he always talks about 6 crore Gujaratis and never about any subset - unlike so called secular leaders like Mulayam Singh Yadav who only peak for Muslims and Yadavs. Modi did not justify the riots in 2002 unlike Rajiv Gandhi who did just that in 1984. So who is communal?
I thought you had a poor opinion of Sushma Swaraj too for bringing up the issue about some movies that apparently offended Hindus in the Indian parliament (Ferzana Versey OpEd). You had challenged people to discuss Hinduism with you but when several people did respond to you, you chose not to join the debate. So now Sushma is okay is it? Or is she preferable only because BJP is less likely to win under her leadership than Modi's?
"Even in Gujarat, Modi’s appeal has diminished as he has lesser seats than before" To say Modi got fewer seats because he got 2 seats less than last time but when he still has over 60% seats is a joke.
" I think the division of India and Pakistan was wrong. We should have put the haters in one land and non-haters in another". Task almost completed. Once you cross the border it will be complete.
@Dee Cee: " ... Some people want to increase the hate, Such hating groups feed on the hate that their counterpart haters generate. I think the division of India and Pakistan was wrong. ... "
Don't be silly. The left and their useful idiots. Bah !!
@Arijit Sharma:
Atum bumb on the christian neighborhood and blame will be on India, Israel and USA.
Hypothetical question - what would happen in Pakistan if a bunch of Christians burnt a coach full of Muslims ?
There is a group in Pakistan that criticizes secular people. There is a group in India that criticizes secular people. Guess which two are most alike? Secular people want to (not by definition) reduce the hate between communities. Some people want to increase the hate, Such hating groups feed on the hate that their counterpart haters generate. I think the division of India and Pakistan was wrong. We should have put the haters in one land and non-haters in another.
@BruteForce: I will repeat and make corrections: Less muslims have died in Gujarat riots than the number of muslims killed in the LAST three months in Pakistan. Pakistan is in such a sad state because of such blatant hypocrisy that exists in moderate muslims and media. Taliban is not a patch on this kind of worrisome mindset. Even a subsect of muslims like shias and ahmadis are not spared. By not publishing this-you do not eradicate this impression!
So ET trying to say:
Once (accused as a) thief, always a thief.
Going by this logic, India should never try to talk with Pakistan because it has repeatedly showed derailed the peace process.
The reason is, in India, if you want to pretend as a secular, you criticize Modi. Media, NGOs and such "wanna be secular" activists have made Modi a "hero" for many right-wingers while he was hardly like that.
Moreover they don't want to change his image at all because in the absence of "Communal" Modi, it will be difficult for many people to show their secular-ness.
I remember last year or so when a MBA degree holder, young head of some Muslim organization (probably Deoband) had said, "there are equal opportunity for Muslims to do business in Gujrat". A huge uproar was created in the Muslim and Secular (both terms are mutually exclusive) world. It was taken as if Modi was given clean chit. Many journalist spent bottles of ink (read buttons on the keyboard) to protest against such "heinous and preposterous" comment. As a result, the guy had to resign and a new person took his place and Modi bashing continued.
No matter to what extent Modi try to show that he is no Muslim hater, media and other Modi-haters will be in denial. And this is the reason why he never tries to woo Muslims.
Few words on Muslims in India. They are a bunch of happy people who are so indulged and self centered they are happy to be a vote bank to keep "communal BJP" out of power. They don't care about bijali, sadak, pani, naukari, tarakki. They have been always used as votebank and if they continue like this, will always be used as a votebank.
Coming to BJP, when Vajpayee completed his term as the PM, in 2004 elections, many prominent Muslims joined and supported BJP. Shahi Imam Bukhari was one of them. Because they saw that despite of 5 years of rule BJP, none of what they feared happened. They were not persecuted, marginalized or anything what Congress and other parties scare them off.
*Not a justified approach by the writer If he had traveled to Gujarat in recent time ...........Not justifying 2002 riots or Godhra train accident but truth is much bigger than this..... Every Gujarati Hindu or Muslim means business outside and religion at home *
To Editior Enough has been commented by fellow readers and showed u who is communal,modi or Pakistan?? I only want to tell u that be prepare for an article "Entire India is communal" when Modiji will be our PM. And yes India is not secular for muslims because their country is Pakistan.They made pakistan and should migrate there
Gujarat is communally divided and hence Modi won. He could bring a trillion dollars, make amazing highways, but he will still be inimical to the spirit of Gandhi and Nehru. More bridges mean ZILCH if India is not secular. India will be torn apart if a hatemonger like Modi (he could not find a single Muslim candidate) becomes the Prime Minister. Anyways, he will never be. He has limited appeal in India outside metros and a handful states (Gujarat, Maharshtra, MP, Karnataka). Nitish Kumar is against Modi and his party has already opposed Modi as the PM candidate. The entire north-east, UP, west Bengal, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Jammu are staunchly anti-Modi. BJP might have a bigger appeal than Modi who is divisive and restrictive. Many Hindus also do not trust him because of the possibility of riots associated with him. People want development, but they do not want violence with that. Even in Gujarat, Modi’s appeal has diminished as he has lesser seats than before. Modi might be the facebook PM of India, replacing the forever PM in waiting, the Iron Man Advani. But BJP will need somebody like Vajpayee. He was loved by all communities alike, and did not hesitate to remind Modi of Rajdharma when required. BJP would do well to junk a hatemonger (staunch Hindutvavadis like Advani never fared well) and look for somebody like Sushma Swaraj, who can counter Sonia and Rahul well.
"But what Modi’s convincing victory does tell us is that communal politics and all that they stand for are alive and well in ‘secular’ India. It is clear that despite the terrible part played by his party in riots directed against Muslims in Gujarat in the past — and his own controversial stance on such affairs — Modi retains a huge following.
This is clearly alarming. It suggests that more than six decades after the violent events of the Partition, India has not been able to create the communal harmony that Jawaharlal Nehru had dreamed of and written so eloquently about in his many pieces of writing. Gujarat is clearly still a long way from this vision. So, too, perhaps, is the rest of India with Modi representing all that is dangerous about a nation where many tensions between communities still live on"
Such an unjust analysis not expected from ET stature newspaper. many a times Modi has offered appologies for the past deeds. Who knows his heart. To me he offered it from the deepest core of his heart. Muslims of Gujrat also see his subsequent deeds and seconded him for consecutive victory. So please ET, stop anti Modi propaganda and take the optimistic approach.
@ ET I have always been appreciative of your editorials but this one is totally unfair since Modi's win Gujarat has been stated as win of communalism in India which is far from truth and also unacceptable to all secular minded people including myself. As a matter of fact, Gujarat is the best run state in India which has been acknowledged by none other than Congress run Central govt. A complete harmony prevails amongst all communities in the state and not a single case of violence has been reported since 2002. Due to peaceful atmosphere in the state, many large industries shifted to Gujarat which created enough employment avenues to locals including Muslims who were not discriminated and benefited from the same and voted for Modi giving him an unprecedented third time victory. Modi's victory in his state does not necessarily mean that he is acceptable as next PM to the people of India who would rather prefer a secular person for this job. However his qualities good governance and development along with his anti-corruption stance makes him a strong contender for the top job but he may not be quite acceptable to many including the allies of the BJP.
fellow Indians commenting here.......lets not forget that modi has been elected democratically...and we don't need to explain that to anyone......i personally dislike him, but I respect the decision of the electorate of Gujarat...
A country based on communalism is accusing another for the same?
I dont kow why author cant see an irony here. No matter what you think of gujrat, its minorities live in better conditions than pakistan.
So the editors think calling Pakistan an Islamic republic and insulting native Hindus and Sikhs is not a problem and neither is Muslims voting in Islamist militant parties like Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood in Arab nations but if Indians elect BJP they are communal?
@ BruteForce who writes "“..his party snatched five Muslim-dominated seats which used to be with the Congress.”"
This is perhaps not true.
Based on the information I have, there's not a single muslim dominated constituency in Gujarat.
Perhaps what you are referring to are the constituencies with higher than average percentage of muslims.
If Erdogan is hailed as breath of fresh air in Turky why there is problem with Modi. He is actually not promoting religion as activily as being prmoted by Erdogan. Modi's win in Gujrat is clearly indicative of people selecting development over useless identity politics.
Do Pakistanis realize how silly they sound when they talk about communalism in other countries?
I am amazed that a relatively balanced newspaper like ET can call India communal because BJP was voted in power in Gujarat while considering PPP who deemed Ahmadis non-Muslims is a secular party.
Under PPP watch, just in 2012, 3 churches were attacked, a temple vandalized and another one razed to ground ,100 Ahmadi graves desecrated and minarets of Ahmadi mosque that no one even dares to call a mosque were destroyed by Punjab police, Aafia bibi still sits in jail and the blasphemy statute stil remains on the books in its current version distorted by Zia. Rimple Kumari was handed over by the court to her tormentors who had raped and forcibly converted her. Lost count of how many Shias have been target killed this year after being identified as Shias.
Ah now you may say but all these incidents were done by 'non-staet-actors;. Same is the case with Gujarat riots. Modi was CM and that is his only connection to Gujrat riots which were brought under control within 2 days by summoning the army. The riots never would have occurred if 60 Hindu pilgrims had not been burnt alive by Muslims. In the last approx 11 years, there have been no riots in Gujarat and Gujarati Muslims too have voted for Modi.
Do you call Qaim Ali Shah responsible for thousands of people killed in target killing in Karachi while he was CM? Why then do you call Modi that for 790 Muslims (and 250 Hindus) who dies 11 years back in a communal riot?
Even Muslims of Gujarat are voting for him..
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/gujarat-elections-has-narendra-modis-sadbhavana-effect-resulted-in-more-muslims-voting-for-the-bjp/articleshow/17702796.cms
Less Muslims have died in the Gujarat riots which happened a decade ago in Gujarat than this year in Karachi, where 2000 perished.
Zero violent incidents have occurred in Gujarat, much less violence than any Pakistani province.
Modi did not kill those Muslims in more than a decade ago. People who were incensed after seeing people being burnt alive in Godra Train incident did. Modi was incapable of stopping them. Now, he has shown how capable he is of governance.
I don't see how such a thing is communal.
Communal, shmommunal. Congress shot itself in the foot with all the corruption scandals and the ineptitude of Rahul, leaving voters no real choice.
Perfect opportunity for Pakistan to do its Islamic duty by declaring the open door policy for the Muslims of Gujarat and rest of India. Invite the Muslims in india to move to Pakistan which was founded in the name of these Indian Muslims. United Nation can be asked to supervise this Hijra by providng safe transportation. Time have come now to this issue be made part of Composite Dialogue and Aman Ki Asha. No community deserves to suffer communalism in either Pakistan or India. .
I hope the moderators would post this post. I am pointing to stark facts. I am a staunch secular person and very strongly against all kinds of communalism. However, we shouldn't be afraid to examine facts and accept the truth if we are ever to solve the problem of communalism.
Let's state the truth here. Almost all Muslim-Hindu tensions, violence and riots in India have been instigated or provoked by Muslims starting in 1920's with the Khilafat movement. The Gujarat riots where 750 Muslims and 300 Hindus were brutally killed was provoked by the burning alive of ~70 Hindu pilgrims in a train at Ghodhra by violent Muslim mobs. Modi did a bad job of reacting fast to a very horrible riot. Ever since he has been blamed that he deliberately allowed the riots to go on, though this hasn't been substantiated by any evidence to-date. I am not a Modi supporter or a nationalist. While it was horrible and anti-human, the deliberate instigation of the riots by the Muslim mobs who burned alive 70 innocent human beings is totally overlooked. No train burning, there would have been no Gujarat riots.
Also, as G.Din has pointed out above, throughout the globe, the ideological and cultural "battle" is always between Muslims and other religionists be they Christians, Hindus, Buddhists etc. Why is that?
Communalism is a word that is bandied about at the drop of a hat these days, and coming from Pakistan, it is likely to draw a laugh or two. It has been stated ad nauseum that everyone who accuses the Gujarat govt of communalism sits outside Gujarat. Clearly acknowledging good work done would deflate this hot air balloon beyond all repair. Instead they cook up a funny answer for every point raised:
Point 1: Gujarat has seen no communal violence in the last 10 years, as compared to several other states ruled by the champions of secularism. Answer: The muslims live in fear and are scared to voice their opinions, and second, the violence is not happening because 'Saiyya bane kotwal to fir kahe ka dar'.. My reading: Riots are a consequence of communal incidents - and any such provocation would have been captured in the media. The VHP and Bajrang Dal worked actively against the BJP in this election because they have been marginalized and their wings clipped. Further, the argument that if riots take place during BJP rule they are to blame, and if they take place when they are in opposition, they are still to blame is a clear example of the brilliant logic that is employed these days.
Point 2: The entire campaign was free of any communal rhetoric and not once did anyone from the ruling party try to polarize the voting public. Answer: The BJP did not even field a single muslim candidate - their message is that we don't care for your vote. My reading; The Congress fielded all of some 5-6 muslim candidates most of whom lost. Do you think this does anything for the muslim community? Are muslim leaders supposed to safeguard muslim interests in this secular country? And isn't that communalism?
Point 3: Modi won on a development agenda and for good governance - better infrastructure, more jobs, reduced crime, safety for women. Answer: All of this is hogwash, Gujarat is doing abysmally, or alternately, has always done well, and the BJP has done nothing. My reading: The Gujarat govt has been awarded the PM's award for excellence in Public Administration in 2012 - imagine how reluctantly they would have acknowledged these achievements. Why are foreign investors making a beeline for Gujarat? Why are Indian industrialists so positive about Modi? If there is a skewed sex ratio in Gujarat, it is Modi's fault, but if a girl gets gangraped in Delhi, the system needs to be improved and Sheila Dixit is absolved of responsibility. This tendency to assume that anyone who disagrees with this dismal picture of Gujarat is a fool or a bigot has been consistently shared in the media for a while now, apparently with no impact on investors or voters. Certainly begs the question, who is lying - the Gujarat govt or the others.
As mentioned, these are my readings and deal with the issues relevant to the recent election campaign. Anyone who wants to (instead) keep the spotlight on the 2002 riots or 1992 riots or 1984 riots is certainly more interested in maintaining communal polarization than I am. Note: A fitting riposte to these points would be a fact-based reply, and not a personal attack on my politics. Disclosure: I have voted for the BJP candidate once in the total four elections where I cast my ballot.
There is only one modi in India. Pakistan is full of people who are infinitely worse than Modi. By the way, did Modi change the laws of his state to discriminate against one particular religion? No. But religious discrimination is enshrined in the Pakistan constitution itself. You have a lot of work to do but very little hope since there is wide support for the discriminatory clauses in the Pakistans constitution among Pakistan's citizens. Thankfully India is not in such a position and you are not Ina position to lecture to it.
"This is clearly alarming. It suggests that more than six decades after the violent events of the Partition, India has not been able to create the communal harmony that Jawaharlal Nehru had dreamed of and written so eloquently about in his many pieces of writing."
As Danish pointed out "Modi won because promised and delivered a developed Gujrat". This is basically a pro development mandate and not pro communal, as you have assumed!! It has been the trend in India recently that people have voted for pro development governments , rising above caste and religious limits. How will you explain Muslims voting for BJP in Bihar and other states??? Second thing "in the volatile world of India’s politics where small factors can trigger big changes" no political party can assume to get majority without support of all the sections of society. Further encouraging fact is BJP has started to disown its own Hindutva agenda long time back but perhaps you have failed to notice that paradigm shift!!!!
Modi is a tall leader of BJP in state of Gujarat. Without Modi, BJP wouldnt have won elections.People of Gujarat re-elected Modi because of work done his govt. This election was fought by all the political parties without any vote bank politics- like language, caste, faith etc . This kind of softening of Modi is encouraging sign for Indian politics. Modi, being branded as communal, Hindu leader, talks of development over communal ideas, thereby getting votes even of Muslims is maturing of politics.This may also be lesson for other leaders ,who are going to hustings.
Look who's talking...
The editorial is one sided and not factually correct. Elections are about multiple issues, present state of the society and that of a reasonable immediate past. In that light
No corruption Excellent law and order, not even a curfew for the past ten years Responsive administration; Email to Chief minster gets an active solution in 2 daysfor local problems Development Independent reports that muslims have progressed the maximum in Gujarat As for 2002 Gujarat riots , more than 200 people have already been convicted , trials are under way. There is not even a court case against Modi in spite of all the clamor by his detractors and independent investigations by Supreme court. Their team in fact cleared Modi. Muslims are voting Modi in increasing numbers ; about 23% in the current polls.The results were inevitable and deservedly so
Nathan
wow...what was that about the pot calling the kettle black or something...This is a vote for Development.
C'mon ET... You guys have gone really crazy; at least it makes one feel so... it is difficult to imagine that Narendra Modi can terrorize someone. across the border, to such an extent. The way you guys have been painting Modis personality as if his main agenda is chopping off Muslims in Gujarat day & night 24x7... Even though no body cares to bring any proof for any evidence of his misdeeds... Now don't you guys remind me abt the riots.. We have never denied that... We accepted the fault, learned lessons, and moved on... Should I expect Pakistanis to get the point i am trying to make? I dont think so... After all Pakistanis consider Jamaat-ud-dawa as purely humanitarian organization.. Just because an organization does humanitarian work does not mean they get a license to propagate hatred, violence, and planning terrorist attacks beyond borders. It makes one feel pity for you guys for it seems Pakistanis are crossing the limits of ignorance... May Allah help you guys come out of ignorance before Pakistan is doomed.
This is a shameful editorial.
Pakistan is not in a position to morally judge what is communism and what is not.
While Pakistan makes a lot of noises about the demolition of Babri Masjid, it rarely condemns the barbaric rule of the Turks and the Mongols (which we call as Mughals) in India, when thousands of temples were destroyed and looted included the Ayodhya temple on top of which a mosque is built today. On the contrary these barbarians, marauders are considered their heroes.
While Pakistan condemns the killing of muslims in Gujrat in unequivocal terms, it has never managed to condemn the killing of innocent Hindus by the muslim mob at Godhra which resulted in the riots that followed.
And funnily enough it hasn't punished a single person for the 3,000,000 murders in 1971.
In my opinion, we need a honest leader like Modi to become the PM of India, to show some people their rightful place.
My vote for BJP only if Modi is the PM candidate, otherwise I distrust BJP as much as I distrust Congress.
Nightmare scenario for Pakistan: Year 2015: Manmohan Singh never visited Pakistan. Modi arrives in Pakistan and repeats Clinton on the Tarmec. He wags his finger and gives a strong lecture to Pakistan and leaves after six hours.
Himachal Pradesh also went to election with Gujarat and BJP Government in Himachal Pradesh was dislodged by Congress-This is vital sign which was ignored in this article.
Ha ha ha... It is very difficult to digest people's verdict for this author and pseudo secular people. Yes, its clearly alarming situation for congress and other pseudo secular medias... This verdict proved that cast politics has no role in front of developments. I wish to see Narendra Modi as PM of India.
"So, too, perhaps, is the rest of India with Modi representing all that is dangerous about a nation where many tensions between communities still live on." Yes, Modi is dangerous to those barbarians and their ilk who would, based entirely on communal hate, burn a bogeyful of pilgrims returning from their pilgrimage to ashes. If he supported the persecuted against an aggressive minority, he is but naturally seen as a hero. There is no tension between any communities other than Muslim in India or elsewhere. Why aren't you bewailing that tension throughout the world and denouncing it as dangerous? Is it because you believe others would push back and India won't? I suggest to you that is a general modicum for a bully!
If communalism was the only reason for Modi's win as you project, then BJP and it's allies should be winning every single one election in every state with Hindu/Muslim communal riots history like Maharashtra, UP, Bihar and Hyderabad. But they don't and the reason is clear to anyone who eyes are not buried 6ft deep in the mud - development.
But the author forgot to mention that Pakistan's constitution itself is Islamic which makes it biased towards Islam hence favourable to Muslims. Indian constitution is secular. One party may support one community or other but it can't undo secularism.
Modi won because he promised and delivered a developed Gujrat. The riots apart it has been generally peaceful. There have been prosecutions. And yes Muslims voted for him and gave their reasons for doing so. Please read them up. The victory did not indicate the triumph of communalism, but rather that the Gujrat Muslims priortized development over religious divides.