RAHUL Gandhi has made it clear that Narendra Modi did not win the election; he lost. Why does Rahul say this? It is no secret. Some people might call it a political disagreement, if someone thinks this way; they have the right to, but Rahul Gandhi’s stance should be understood in the light of political history. However, Modi’s defeat is not a simple matter; its roots can be traced back to thousands of years of the subcontinent’s history and psychology.
When the subcontinent was partitioned in 1947, resulting in the independence of Pakistan and India, there were more than 550 princely states in the region. Going back even further, to the Mughal era and the rulers before them, this number reaches into thousands. This number reveals the historical fact that the subcontinent was never considered a single country. How, then, was it possible that, as soon as the Muslims, and particularly the Mughals, established their empire in this region, it became united, eventually giving rise to the concept of a united India? The recent electoral defeat of Narendra Modi, or his weakened political position, can be better understood against this historical backdrop. But before that, it is crucial to understand why India was not a single country before the Muslims and how it became united during their rule.
The subcontinent was divided into small states and local governments because the rulers of that time could not rise above their interests and religious biases. This narrow-mindedness was the biggest obstacle to the subcontinent becoming a unified country. After taking control, Muslims, especially the Mughals, expanded power from a single class to include all races and religious groups. This allowed local wealth to be distributed more broadly. India became the “golden bird” as a result of this policy. This liberal policy of the Mughals transformed the fragmented princely states into a unity. When students of political history study India of that era, they realize that the concept known as secularism was genuinely and originally practiced here. A broader analysis of this aspect of history shows that the Mughal Empire, the Ottoman Empire in Turkey and the contemporary Muslim empire in Spain all shared this principle of governance. History indicates that the strength of these three Muslim empires lay in this secularism.
During the Muslim rule in the subcontinent, Hindus participated in central governance, and if regional states did not choose conflict, their right to rule was acknowledged. This concept of peaceful coexistence based on “live and let live” united a fragmented India. This accomplishment was so significant that the ancient Hindu population recognized its importance and honoured Emperor Akbar with the title “Akbar the Great.” Despite the majority opinion of Hindus in the subcontinent, there were still those who opposed this system and considered it slavery. These are the same groups that later led the Shuddhi and Sangathan movements. These elements have emerged from the ideological platform of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) in both the past and present. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and Narendra Modi represent the political embodiment of this ideology. They believe that they were enslaved for a thousand years and now must take revenge through Hindutva by establishing Ram Rajya. All of Modi’s extremist actions during his ten years in power were steps towards achieving this goal.
Other political forces and progressive factions in India saw this approach as a threat to India’s unity. They felt that if Modi continued unchecked, the country would not only lose its constitution but also face the risk of disintegration. The opposition alliance led by Congress highlighted this truth to the nation and conducted their election campaign with the constitution in their hand. The Indian public understood their stance. This is why Modi’s ambition to secure more than four hundred seats was shattered. Now he leads a minority government and his power depends on regional parties. This means that the recent election results are a defeat for the ideology of Hindutva. By not giving the BJP a majority vote in the 2024 elections, the Indian public has endorsed the ideology of Akbar the Great and rejected the racist and sectarian elements. Will Narendra Modi understand this message from the Indian people? We will find out in the near future.
Whether Narendra Modi understands the public’s mood or not, the reality is that the people of India have delivered a historic verdict. It is expected that in the coming years, the number of people who disagree with Modi’s ideology will increase. The people of India are likely to reject regional expansionism and the arms race because the recent elections have ignited a ray of hope. Now, it is essential for Modi’s opposition to maintain their unity and to continue highlighting the drawbacks of BJP’s ideology through public engagement. This approach will be beneficial not only for India but for the entire region. Mian Nawaz Sharif, President of the Pakistan Muslim League (N), and Prime Minister of Pakistan Mian Muhammad Shahbaz Sharif, have sent a congratulatory message to Narendra Modi on becoming Prime Minister for the third time. If Modi responds practically by reducing the tension, it will be quite telling. It will reveal whether the dream of a peaceful and prosperous subcontinent will be realized or if it will fall victim to Modi’s narrow-mindedness.
—The writer is contributing columnist.
