In keeping with his well known strategy of using the media to keep the prime minister off balance and to force a decision on him, Mr Arjun Singh has said that elections in UP, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan and Himachal Pradesh will not be held within six months of the dismissal of BJP governments in these states, as normally required under the Constitution. He has also revived the question of derecognition of the BJP. The government is doubtless entitled to extend the period of President’s rule from six months to one year. But this has been done only in states such as Punjab, Jammu and Kashmir and Assam where terrorism has made it virtually impossible to ensure fair and free elections. Thus the only inference that can be drawn is that Mr Arjun Singh too recognizes that the Congress will not be in a position to face the people within six months.
This much is, of course, obvious. Even the worst detractors of BJP are aware that the tide of public opinion is running so strongly in its favour in the wake of New Delhi’s decisions to ban the RSS and dismiss BJP governments that it will sweep the polls. What is cause for concern is that some elements might seek to provoke trouble in the four states in order to justify extension of President’s rule. Such things have happened in the past. This time the RSS, driven underground, would serve as a convenient scapegoat. Its leaders have to be wary.
In any case, it would be legitimate to ask the question why within days of the dismissal of the four state governments, Mr Singh has been so keen to put it on record that elections would not be held within the stipulated period of six months. One possibility is that as in the case of his demand for the dismissal of the BJP government in Madhya Pradesh, his statement to the press on Saturday (December 19) marks the beginning of a campaign intended to close the options of Prime Minister PV Narasimha Rao in this regard.
As if to avoid loss of face, Mr Singh also said that in case the BJP was so sure of popular support, it should ask its 119 MPs in the Lok Sabha to resign and seek re-election. But what guarantee can there be that byelections will be held immediately? Indeed, since he finds elections in four states inconvenient, it is a safe inference that Mr Singh would be opposed to byelections to the Lower House. In the past, byelections have been postponed for long periods on one pretext or another.
The BJP is, of course, not going to oblige Mr Singh and he knows it. His ‘challenge’ can, therefore, be disregarded as part of a carefully crafted strategy. He needed to sound brave in view of the reluctance to face the people in the four states. More notable is his rejection of a referendum on the issue of the government’s proposal to build the Ram temple in Ayodhya and his move to sidetrack the question of ‘reconstruction’ of the Babri structure.
It is difficult to fault him on these questions. India is a parliamentary and not a plebiscitary democracy. However critical the temple issue, a referendum on it will almost certainly become a precedent, making the slide of Indian democracy into chaos even more difficult to arrest than it is already.
Similarly, it is obvious that the union government can undertake ‘reconstruction’ of the demolished structure in Ayodhya only if it is determined to provoke widespread riots. Before amendment to the emergency provisions in the Constitution under the Janata Party government in 1977, such disturbances could well be used to impose emergency and suspend the fundamental rights, as Mrs Indira Gandhi did in 1975. Now it may be more difficult to do so. Even otherwise it is rather surprising that the Union home minister should have reaffirmed the commitment to rebuild the structure last Friday.
He was clearly inept. Indeed, Mr Chavan’s obvious ineptitude may well explain Mr Arjun Singh’s move to distance himself from the ‘decision’ as well as him. Mr Singh did not give a clean bill of health to the Prime Minister in the question of the latter’s handling of the Ayodhya dispute but at least went through the motion. In Mr Chavan’s case, he did not do even that much, he only requested media persons not to ask him to issue edicts about somebody “stepping down”. It would be speculation to infer that Mr Singh would like to replace Mr Chavan as home minister. But the speculation may not be too wide off the mark. The home ministry would certainly give Mr Singh the leverage he needs to carry on the war on the BJP and the RSS and to strengthen his bid for the office of prime minister. He denied any such ambition. But nobody takes his denials at their face value. Mr Rao cannot miss so obvious a manoeuvre. This makes it virtually certain that he will not shift Mr Chavan from the home ministry, inspired reports in the press notwithstanding.
The Observer of Business and Politics, 21 December 1992