India 360: Rahul, feudal or radical?

SON OF THE SOIL: Rahul Gandhi seems to be focusing on keeping the Gandhi brand alive in India.

    

:

Featured Blog

Rajdeep Sardesai

Tale of Two Azmis

Featured Slideshows

Related Headlines

powered by

• Rahul's roadshow ends, storm starts
• Rahul roadshow hits RLD bumper
• Rahul's roadshow revs up Cong hopes

Keywords: Roadshow, Rahul Gandhi

New Delhi: Amethi MP Rahul Gandhi is at the end of his three day roadshow in western Uttar Pradesh. The crowds were perhaps a bit thin, the speeches contained a few faux pas, but the message was clear: Rahul Gandhi is in the political battleground.

On the last day, the scion of the Gandhi family said that he has a new vision for a golden future. However, many feel that with the Babri Masjid comment made in the quest for Muslim votes, Rahul may have indicted his own party.

Rahul had earlier said, "Had anyone from the Gandhi family been active in 1992, the Babri Masjid demolition would not have happened at all." He also said, "I have come here with a vision and only youth power can make the change happen. I wish to inspire the youth."

The young leader had also said, "The 1996 alliance destroyed Congress in UP. The alliance in UP was a virtual sell-out of the Congress party in Uttar Pradesh."

The question CNN-IBN was asking on India 360 was: Has Rahul Gandhi made an impact on the nation and in UP or has he demonstrated his political immaturity?

On the panel of experts to try and answer the question were CEO, Future Brands, Santosh Desai; Congress Spokesperson, Jayanti Natrajan; and Editor in Chief , Pioneer / MP , Rajya Sabha, Chandan Mitra.

Were Rahul's statements impactful or just naive?

Rahul Gandhi's statement that if a Gandhi family member had been ruling, the Babri Masjid would not have been demolished, seems like a feudal indictment of the Congress party. He seems to be trying to say that Congress as a party is not good enough and not secular enough, and it is only the Gandhi family that is secular enough and which could have protected the Babri Masjid.

Jayanti Natrajan disagreed with this point of view saying, "That's not what he meant at all. What Rahul Gandhi said was no more than Congress' stated position that the Congress party stood for secularism. What he has said perhaps should be seen in the context of the fact that this was something Rajiv Gandhi had perhaps observed. And if you remember at that time this was in the air that we should stop the demolition at all costs. This was the Congress' party's stand. So I don't believe he said anything more than our stated position."

But then there have been rumours that it was Rajiv Gandhi who had opened the gates of the Babri Masjid and allowed the puja of the Ram Lalla, and the Shilanyass (foundation laying ceremony) for the Ram temple on the disputed land on November 9, 1989. On December 6, 1992, the Babri Masjid was demolished and it was the V P Singh government which was at the Centre then.

Rajiv Gandhi was also the one who overturned the Shah Bano judgement, which led to accusations of appeasement and which also led to the entire VHP movement. In a nutshell, was it not Rajiv Gandhi himself who flirted with Hindutva forces?