Adept at its role behind the scenes, the fountainhead of Hindutva, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh gave a clean chit to the Narendra Modi administration after the Gujarat carnage. Describing the violence after the Godhra incident as a “natural reaction of Hindus,” the RSS on Friday gave a clean chit to the Narendra Modi administration in Gujarat, saying that no government could have controlled the “upsurge.” While expressing the view that the “natural reaction”(the violence) was unjustifiable, RSS spokesperson M G Vaidya said, “whole Hindu society irrespective of caste, creed and political affiliations, reacted violently against what had happened at Godhra.” (The Times of India, March 16, 02.)

Two days after this declaration giving Modi and his men a clean chit, the Sangh adopted a resolution at its three-day conference of the Akhil Bharatiya Pratinidhi Sabha which concluded at Chennenahalli. The resolution read : “Let Muslims understand that their real safety lies in the goodwill of the majority.’’ Although a few Muslim leaders interpreted ‘jehad’ as not supporting terrorism, they had not been able to influence the extremist elements, it said. “The Sabha wants to make it clear that it does no credit to the Muslim community to allow itself to be made pawns in the hands of extremist leaders,’’ it added.

Describing the Godhra incident as “horrible and ghastly,” the RSS delegates said it had become imperative to present it in the proper perspective. The reaction to the incident was spontaneous. The entire Hindu society had reacted. It was unfortunate that a number of people died in the violence.

“The Muslims would be safe in the country provided they won the goodwill of the majority community. They had to accept the law of the land which they are not doing now.’’ “They should desist from provoking the Hindus.’’ He regretted that the Hindu lives had no value in India.

Justifying the systematic post-Godhra carnage, the RSS joint general secretary said that it had become imperative to present Godhra in the proper perspective. “The reaction to the incident was spontaneous. The entire Hindu society had reacted. It was unfortunate that a number of people died in the violence.” (The quality of the ‘reaction,’ which includes rape, tearing apart a woman’s womb, hacking to death and burning to cinders is conveniently glossed over in the term “Hindu society reacted”)

The RSS did not stop there. Despite the outrage and condemnation that the Bangalore resolution had drawn, RSS spokesman MG Vaidya further elaborated on the RSS’ advice to Muslims saying, “Muslims must earn the goodwill of the Hindu majority for their safety, We also ask them to re-interpret some Islamic terms and condemn all violence being perpetrated against Hindus, rather than playing in the hands of Hindu-baiters.” MG Vaidya listed three words — kafir (infidels), kufr (the philosophy of infidels) and jehad (holy war against infidels) — and demanded that “Muslims re-interpret and define” them. When asked how, in his view, Muslims could earn the goodwill of Hindus, Vaidya said they had to condemn the activities of those who professed to carry out a ‘‘jehad’’ against ‘‘idol-worshippers.’’ He said the RSS did not consider all Muslims to be terrorists, but many terrorists happened to be Muslims and claimed that they were pursuing ‘‘jehad.”

The RSS spoke its mind, making it clear that there were to be no regrets expressed for the genocide. The message to Muslims is clear. But there is in this also a message for all ‘liberal’ Hindus who see the RSS brand of faith as a travesty of their own religion and therefore oppose it.

The Sangh, through BJP president, Jana Krishnamurthy, managed to quash prime minister Vajpayee’s plan to accept Modi’s token resignation. In this and other moves, it is clear who pulls the punches in government even today.

The systematic violence unleashed in Gujarat has all the elements of genocide. Lives maimed, hacked, raped and brutally destroyed, economic decimation and cultural and religious desecration. It is this element in the RSS worldview that envisages an India based on superiority and inferiority of race, that sanctions violence, threat and hatred to achieve its goals in the bargains that draw a chilling likeness between Hindutva and Facism.

Is this the behaviour of a mere cultural outfit?

(Courtesy: The Combat Archives )