The Hindu Business Line : What led to the Babri Masjid demolition?

Ayodhya, December 6, 1992. Doesn't that look like an ominous dateline, reminding one of the destruction of the Babri Masjid? Yes, and it's the title of a new book from Penguin. The author is P.V. Narasimha Rao, who had wished that the publishing happened posthumously.

`The definitive account... from the man who knew it best,' announces the press release that opens with this line: "The truth about Ayodhya... can now be told." Questions that the book attempts to answer are many. Such as: "What led to the demolition of the Babri Masjid? Why could nothing be done to prevent it? Who stood to gain from the incident, and how?"

Wikipedia devotes a detailed page to the shameful tragedy and notes: "The communal riots that followed ripped apart the secular fabric of the nation." Timeline for the mosque, on http://news.bbc.co.uk, begins with the year 1528. After, perhaps, centuries of peaceful coexistence, "First recorded incidents of religious violence at the site," is traced to 1853.

What happened on December 6, 1992, was not the resolution of a long-standing dispute but a crude trampling of sentiments. And the date has ever since remained etched as a blot in Indian history.

"Even today, the Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute has not been resolved, and Ayodhya remains a hotbed of political intrigue and communal tension," notes Penguin's press release. Rao was the Prime Minister on that fateful day. And his book, soon to be available in translation too, is billed as "a comprehensive account of the machinations... "

One learns that Rao wrote this book after he stepped down. "I cannot count how many people, both friends and opponents, have hurled at me the question, `Why did you not impose President's Rule in Uttar Pradesh in order to save the Babri Masjid from vandalism on 6 December 1992?' Indeed, this question must be examined... " reads an excerpt. To call it vandalism, though, would be a gross understatement.

"Could nothing have been done to prevent what happened at Ayodhya on 6 December 1992? Why did the Union Government take no action when the kar sevaks were flouting a Supreme Court order? Why were paramilitary forces not deployed to protect the Babri Masjid when it was under imminent threat? Why did the State Government of Uttar Pradesh not intervene in any way... "

Rao records how the issue of building a Ram mandir at Ayodhya `was politicised for electoral benefit'. The teaser from Penguin indicates that Rao has discussed Article 365 of the Constitution at length, and explained `why it was inadvisable to place UP under President's Rule.' All this by "drawing on the Supreme Court order, parliamentary proceedings, eyewitness reports and his own political insights."

What purpose does the book serve? `To unravel the truth... (as a) service to the secular polity of India and an eye-opener to the people,' is from another snatch of Rao-speak. "Religious emotion has been made to sway the electorate in the Lok Sabha elections of 1989 and 1991, and Assembly elections in Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat, etc," he rued.

The account might be "too late in the day to be of any political value - the purpose of the disinformation having been achieved already in some elections," he conceded.

It is not unusual for books to be brought out after the death of the author. But what is eerie with Rao's book is his stated wish that the book be published posthumously.

Which is what gives rise to a queasy question that Rao might not answer: whether a truth that affected a whole nation, and whole generations thereafter, merited the same treatment as a secret private will?

E&OE@TheHindu.co.in

More Stories on : Books | Errors & Omissions Expected | Politics

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Jumbo fest

Akshaya Tritiya spells gold rush for banks

Sudoku

Dhoni is now NDTV's scoop

What led to the Babri Masjid demolition?