Shimla agreement and Jana Sangh

 

Shimla agreement

                                                                       NK SINGH 

There are very few important moments in the history of a country such as that of the Simla Agreement. Naturally, the event and its aftermath were given wide coverage in the Indian Press. Almost all the newspapers praised it as a step in the direction of escalating the Indo- Pak cordial relations and of course towards a permanent peace on the sub-continent. 

The lone voice of dissent was that of the Jana Sangh-oriented journals like Organiser and the Motherland. And scrutiny would bring out the fact that these two journals gave more space to the subject than any other newspaper in the country.

The motive as well as the work- method of the communal Press becomes clear from one single story which came out in the Jana Sangh daily The Motherland, on July 31, the day the Jana Sangh had planned a demonstration before the Parliament to protest against the Agreement. 

In a New Delhi datelined story, the paper's special correspondent reported that "Pakistani troops opened fire on a group of Indian soldiers in Naya Chhor yesterday, killing two of them on the spot and seriously injuring many others." This story, which was described as completely false and fabricated by the Prime Minister, was given a front page treatment--to be more precise an eight-column banner.

This, however, was not an isolated phenomenon. As early as on the eve of the Simla summit, the Sangh daily made a novel discovery of the "contrast in style" between Mrs Indira Gandhi and Mr Z.A. Bhutto. 

While the Prime Minister had shown "unmitigated arrogance by not only keeping the opposition completely out but also by not even consulting it," President Bhutto who, it said, "also claims a massive mandate" had "associated Opposition parties" in the Simla talks. The apparent conclusion was that Bhutto was a greater democrat!

Soon after the historic pact was signed at Simla, the Sangh daily pounced upon it, describing it as a "historic blunder" and "sell out"- a term borrowed from the JS leader A.B. Vajpayee. The reason, it stated, "is no doubt the old habitual Congress appeasement of Muslims, but an even more powerful factor at work is the foreign powers... Russo-American pressure.

Continuing its all-out offensive on the agreement, the Jana Sangh weekly Organiser discovered evidence that the Prime Minister's aides were "now eating her own words." Quoting from the remarks made by Mrs Gandhi's principal private secretary, Mr P. N. Haksar, and Foreign Secretary, Mr T.N. Kaul, it drew out the conclusion that they were wriggling out of previous commitments to secure a final settlement of the Kashmir issue.

Taking the same line, The Motherland charged Mrs Gandhi and Mr Swaran Singh with "budging the issue." It emphasised the discrepancy between their claim to have firmly adhered to the Indian stand that Kashmir is a bilateral issue and Mr Bhutto's continued insistence that it "is an international issue and has to be settled through appropriate authority." 

The substance of several articles published in the newspaper such as 'Simla Only Echoes Tashkent', 'Simla Worse Than Tashkent' and 'The Simla Betrayal'-was reflected in this typical editorial remark: "The leopard cannot change its spots and President Bhutto cannot change his anti-India mentality." Supporting Jana Sangh's demand for a referendum on the agreement, it wrote: "The demand... is a call for involving the people in the process of deciding a grave national issue."

But, by and large, Jana Sangh was the odd man out. Its Press remained isolated on the issue, with the party's behaviour being condemned by papers all over the country. It was ticked off, almost unanimously, for bad behaviour within Parliament and bad tactics outside it. 

Leftist Century commented that the JS has "the unique distinction of being the only party decrying the Simla agreement. Never has it been more alienated from the mood of the people." The pro-Moscow weekly Link said that "barring the lone Acharya Kriplani and the Lohia Socialist, no other party has sided with the Sangh." 

The Political Correspondent of Frontier, the left radical weekly, had to offer a very good reason for "a section of the left establishment (which) had mounted a campaign against Mr Bhutto and finds itself in the distinguished company of the Jana Sangh." The Correspondent wrote, "Could it be that the public Soviet posture welcoming the agreement notwithstanding, there is uneasiness at the thought that India might not depend on the Soviet veto on the Kashmir issue any more?"

But the best example of Jana Sangh isolation was given by Garuda in the CPI organ, New Age: "The worst blow Jana Sangh leader got was from C. R., their right reactionary ally. The observer noted with interest that the JS Hindi weekly, Panchajanya, wrote on July 9; "Amidst the wild drum-beating of government propaganda, Jana Sangh's voice may today sound like a cry in the wilderness. But It is not so. Our country's seniormost statesman Rajagopalachari has said that the summit conference was not successful."

Writing in his party's weekly, Swarajya, the founder leader of Swatantra Party, Rajgoapalachari, characterised the Jana Sangh opposition to the Simla pact as one "based on unregulated emotions." He wrote "Mr Vajpayee's opposition meant the opposition of the military forces of India to cope with Pakistan and practically the whole world. Any attempt in this direction would lead to the total breakdown of India's economy. Fortunately, the Jana Sangh opposition has made no impression on the general public..."

And when the friends are so harsh, how can you expect the enemies to be polite? The pro-Moscow weeklies, Mainstream and Link, described the Jana Singh agitation as its latest stunt", which had "amused the observers in the Capital."

Even somewhat conservative Statesmen described the Sangh tactics as "Sectarian hysteria under the cloak of working in the national interest. Its plea that its campaign is not politically motivated is unlikely to carry much conviction even among its followers. The Prime Minister was near the mark when she said that the Sangh was raising the controversy over the agreement because it had no other issue to agitate about."

But Century thought that "hatred towards Pakistan is the life breath and raison d'etre of this party of middle-class Hindus consisting of socially privileged and economically powerful castes. So, amity between India and Pakistan and inter-communal goodwill mean the death knell of Jana Sangh."

Writing in New Age, the CPI leader Bhupesh Gupta observed that "one of the objectives of the Jana Sangh is to arouse communal passion and chauvinism so that it may revive its slumping political stock." 

Blitz correspondent A. Raghavan agreed with Mr Gupta: "This is seen here as part of the desperate search by the Jana Sangh leadership to refloat the party grounded by two successive electoral disasters." An article in Mainstream put the matter straight and said that the "gimmick" was "one of the several methods to keep together its disillusioned and frustrated ranks, and boost its leadership's image which was never so low." 

The Congress daily, National Herold had adopted a somewhat milder tone and said that its stand "smacks of political narrow-mindedness." The paper further stated: Its stand that the Pakistani territory occupied by the Indian army should not be returned shows only that it is not for peace and friendship with Pakistan. For historical as well as communal reasons the Jana Sangh has been pursuing an anti-Pakistan policy persistency, and on Pakistan, it will continue to be one-track minded."

But the best answer to the Sangh arguments was given by Rajendra Sharma in an article in The Indian Express "It is significant that critics of the Simla agreement have yet to put forth a viable alternative that could have served Indian interests better... The most untenable argument against the Simla agreement is that Pakistan after achieving her immediate objectives will mount another attack against us. It makes nonsense of the other argument that, having trounced Pakistan, India should have made her agree to an immediate settlement of the Kashmir dispute here and now."

While the Jana Sangh journals saw the hand of foreign powers behind the agreement, organs of both the right and left CPI accused the Jana Sangh of "playing the U.S. imperialists' games." CPM weekly People's Democracy commented: "A durable peace in the subcontinent is as much anathema to the Jana Sangh as to the U.S. imperialists because that will knock out the vicious communal base on which alone the Jana Sangh can thrive." 

New Age wrote: "This eminently coincides with the designs of imperialists and other forces hostile to India." However, it is well known that the Communists accuse everything of being pro-American with which they do not agree. Hence, the balance was provided by National Herald: "If Mr Vajpayee sees a Soviet hand in the happenings at Simla, his critics may see a U.S. hand in the Jana Sangh's disruptive tactics. One allegation is as baseless as the other."

What will be the outcome of such a jingoistic posture? Statesman warned that the agitation is "bound to lead to avoidable tension which will have the effect of further escalating the synthetic crisis now sought to be created by the party." 

New Age and Mainstream had, however, strong warnings. Recalling the Motherland argument-"For the second time in six years the victory won by the Jawan on the battlefield has been frittered away by the Congress politicians at the negotiating table. By thus cheaply bartering away the fruits of our soldiers, and labours, the Government is playing with the morale and fighting spirit of our troops. If time and again territories won by sweat, blood and tears are going to be coolly handed back to the enemy, the question may well arise: Why at all fight and die to gain any ground?"

A Mainstream writer forewarned that the JS "wants to cause dissatisfaction among the armed forces, resorting to unscrupulous tactics to weaken the country from inside." New Age too saw in it a "plain affront to the patriotism and loyalty of our gallant jawans,"

Another question is, has Jana Sangh gained anything? Link says, no, "It failed colossally." On the other hand, "the campaign has shown not only the Jana Sangh's political isolation but some of its internal weaknesses also... The Sangh Working Committee meeting (July 17-19) revealed that only the party units from Rajasthan, Jammu and Kashmir and to some extent Gujrat were enthusiastic about the whole campaign." 

It concluded, "Though it has helped the Sangh leadership to present a facade of unity, there is a strong undercurrent of nervousness. The current campaign may prove to be the last 'bold' effort by Vajpayee to save the party from disruption. On the face of it, he may claim to have succeeded. But knowledgeable circles do not agree with such an assessment." 

SECULAR DEMOCRACY 

September 1972