Perhaps for the first time in history, Sangh steps into the sunlight

By R Jagannathan
Perhaps for the first time ever, the Sangh now sees direct communication with citizens as vital to its existence and future

RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat’s headline-grabbing event in Delhi from 17-19 September can be read in three different ways: his statements can be read literally; or they can be read in the context of the emerging political scenario where the outcome of the general elections in 2019 can no longer be considered predictable; or they can be examined to check how far the Sangh has moved from its own basic positions since its formation in 1925 by Keshav Baliram Hedgewar.

At the outset, it is important to underline that the big signalling comes not from the content or context of the statements made by Bhagwat, but the fact that they were made at all. Perhaps for the first time ever, the Sangh now sees direct communication with citizens as vital to its existence and future. Earlier, the Sangh largely spoke through its front organisations: the BJP in politics; the VHP in religious matters; the BMS on the labour front; the ABVP on the campus. And so on. Now, it is realising that it is best to speak for oneself.

In a world of hyper-media coverage, allowing others — whether authorised or not — to speak on your behalf means giving away half the communication advantage. With fanatical organisations like the Sanatan Sanstha, suspected to be involved in some violent activities, now assumed to be another front of the Sangh, the RSS probably thought it better to define itself formally to the nation instead of allowing its critics to do so.

High time. The world’s largest NGO, which has more than half a million people attending its 56,000 daily shakas, and with perhaps 10 times as many involved with it tangentially, needs to tell us where it stands on issues that concern all of us.

Among the significant things Bhagwat spoke about were the following: one, he does not favour a Congress-mukt Bharat (“hum log to sarvlok-yukt Bharat waale hain, mukt waale nahin hain”), and even lauded its role in the freedom movement; contrary to media assumptions, he claimed that the RSS had no role in the BJP government, though it does exchange views with it; RSS workers are free to work for any party; the Sangh does not support gau rakshaks taking the law into their own hands or lynching people; on the contrary, he challenged gau rakshaks to first learn to adopt cows, and even mentioned that some Muslims ran gaushalas with “dedication.” Most significantly, he claimed that Hindutva and Hindu Rashtra were not about excluding Muslims and minorities. “Hum kehte hain ki hamara Hindu rashtra hai. Hindu rashtra hai iska matlab isme Mussalman nahi chahiye, aisa bilkul nahi hota. Jis din ye kaha jayega yahan Muslim nahi chahiye, us din vo Hindutva nahin rahega.”

And the biggest break from the past was Bhagwat’s distancing of the Sangh from some of the anti-minority comments of its fiery second sarsanghchalak, MS Golwalkar, who seemed to accord the minorities second-class citizenship in a future Hindu rashtra. While Bhagwat did not say Golwalkar was no longer relevant, he said the Sangh would leave out some of the controversial speeches of Golwalkar from its new publications. Things said by Golwalkar during the time of partition and Hindu-Muslim violence were not relevant today, he implied.

Do all these statements and observations by Bhagwat suggest that the Sangh is shedding its old clothes (it did so literally when it abandoned khakhi shorts for trousers a few years ago), and emerging as a more modern entity in the 21st century? Some of the change is real, for the Sangh’s social structure has changed; it is less Brahmanical than in the past, with OBCs and Dalits adding significantly to diversity in the cadres; it even has Muslim and Christian wings. It has changed its stance on Section 377, and is no longer in favour of criminalising gay relationships.

It is tougher to believe that the Sangh does not indulge in politics, given the reality is that it offers senior karyakartas the option to take up official positions in the BJP’s organisation and to campaign for its candidates; its praise for the Congress can also be seen as a hedging of bets, since no one can guarantee that the BJP will come back to power in 2019. As for its stand on Hindu rashtra and Hindutva, the difference seems to be in how it is nuancing its views now as opposed to how it was doing so earlier. To say that its Hindutva now includes Muslims is not very much different from saying that all Indians whose forefathers were Hindus are Hindu culturally. The Sangh has always defined its Hindu identity culturally rather than in religious terms, and so this is not necessarily a significant departure from its position in the past. But the formal acceptance of Muslims as an inalienable and composite part of Bharat is important.

It is possible to reach a tentative conclusion that the Sangh is slowly metamorphosing into something different from the prickly and secretive organisation it has been seen as till now. The mere fact that it needs to explain itself to the world at large is a significant achievement. Stepping into sunlight means greater transparency - and sunlight is anyway a great disinfectant. But the proof of the pudding is in the eating; words spoken today need to be backed by deeds and actions tomorrow.

One must, however, give the Sangh its due: given the mindless excoriation of the Sangh by its critics, it is brave of Bhagwat to now subject his organisation to more public scrutiny. If it has abandoned its old defensiveness and siege mentality, it is a good thing. Organisations like the RSS will always be feared given their size and spread, but once they believe they must explain what they are up to and become more transparent, they become more accountable in the process. That is the biggest gain from Bhagwat’s three-day speak-and-tell performance.

The author is editorial director of Swarajya magazine.