Steve King, R-Iowa, vice chairman of the immigration subcommittee of the US House of Representatives, created an uproar last year when he drew parallels between attracting the best from around the world to emigrate to America and picking the best dog of a litter. King, his critics said, was speaking disparagingly of immigrants. Oh, no, King cried, adding that opponents were distorting his words. Unlike King, Narendra Modi, the chief minister of the western Indian state of Gujarat, is not known for his pointed, let-the-chips-fall-where-they-may rhetoric. He chooses his words carefully. So Modi knew what he meant when he compared his “sadness” at the loss of human lives in the 2002 Gujarat massacre to that of the backseat occupant of a car that overran a puppy. After this insensitive remark triggered the predicable outrage in India, Modi and his supporters are putting on an air of injured innocence. But not many will be convinced. There are many reasons for this skepticism. For one thing, Modi gives media interviews only on the condition that there will be no questions about his role in the carnage in which more than 1,000 Muslims were burned or hacked to death by marauding mobs. The riots occurred one year after he took over as Gujarat's chief executive. Why did he make an exception to the Friday interview to Reuters unless he wanted to make a point? So Modi, BJP's candidate for prime minister, was using the interview to convey a message to his anti-Muslim constituency that he would continue to play hardline Hindutva politics of the most virulent and vicious kind. He would not soften his stance to appear placatory toward Muslims or remove the misgivings of the constituents of the National Defense Alliance led by BJP. Modi knew that Indians outside Gujarat have been waiting to hear his thoughts on the riots, especially now that he is going to play a role on national stage. But rather than easing decade-old tensions, Modi made it clear that he was prepared to take a stand against secularism which, however imperfectly implemented, has remained the bedrock of national politics ever since India won independence. Not only would he refuse to express remorse or apology for the 2002 bloodshed but he was also prepared to try his philosophy and policies at national level. So Modi has made it clear that he was ready to challenge the consensus around which India's democracy operates. This is a challenge to all national parties. But the biggest challenge is to his own BJP which, though based on Hindutva, has been trying to broaden its appeal to lure minorities, including Muslims who form the second largest segment of the population after Hindus. Private studies estimate that India has about 177 million Muslims, comprising 14.6 percent of the total population. There are several parliamentary constituencies where their vote can make all the difference between defeat and victory. No party can hope to win a parliamentary majority ignoring Muslim votes or sentiments. Moreover, Modi is yet to prove he has an appeal outside Gujarat. His foray into Karnataka proved disastrous for the ruling BJP in elections to the state legislature last month. The furor over the puppy remark shows how the Gujarat riots still cast a long shadow over Indian politics. The BJP and its allies can only ignore this at their own peril.
