A principled stand

The Indian National Congress (INC) has taken a principled stand by refusing to send its representatives to the inauguration ceremony of the Ram Temple at Ayodhya set for January 22.

Not only the grand old party has saved itself from walking into the RSS-BJP trap of getting co-opted, but has also shown its renewed commitment and compliance with secular ethos that form the sheet-anchor of the party’s foundational ideology.

It was courageous of the party to have overcome the initial dilemma and refused to bite the bait from the saffron camp which could have given its political adversaries propaganda mileage had it fallen prey to the invitation.

Even as the nation welcomes the consecration of a grandiose Ram temple in Ayodhya, its consecration prior to the completion of its construction is seen as an electorally motivated initiative by the Central Government led by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

The kind of haste being shown was unwarranted if the project had mere religious significance.

Heads of prominent religious mutts who have held the consecration ceremony before completion against the tenets of Hinduism, lend a ring of credence to Karnataka chief minister Mr. Siddramaiah’s charge that the move divides the Hindus.

The decision to refuse participation by the Congress is first unequivocal indication of its ideological stand on the contentious issue and is in contradistinction of the ambiguity it had betrayed during the last three decades.

The December 6, 1992 events in Ayodhya had eroded the trust the minorities and liberal-minded sections had reposed in the party leading to its exit from power in key states of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar (and their splinters later).

During the intervening decades, the party had failed to express its stand in an objective and transparent manner although the Supreme Court had accepted that the Babri Masjid demolition was an illegal and criminal act.

It had also declared that the report of the Archaeological Survey of India following excavation, did not opine that the disputed mosque stood on the demolished ruins of any previous structure.

It is not difficult to foresee that the stand will have a cathartic effect on the rank and file of the party as hinted by the murmurs of dissent. The party may risk a few defections.

It is predictable as the Congress’s shining armour of secularism had lost enough of its sheen due to compromises the party made on its key ethos. Some degree of dissonance and dissidence is quite in order.

But it is useful to be reminded that the long term revival of the party lies in returning to its ideological roots.

Vote-earning consideration might result in short term political gains but corrodes the moral foundation of the party needed to retain the edge as a force of change.