Missing A Major Link

R Gopalakrishnan

India’s nuclear explosions are welcome but ‘a more dangerous explosion’ in the form of communal holocaust through the Ayodhya agenda of the VHP ought to be averted -- this sums up the stance of a representative section of the Tamil media on the two most controversial issues arising from the ideology of the present powers-that-be in Delhi.

The reaction of several Tamil periodicals makes it clear that they see no link but only a contrast between the BJP-led government exercising the nuclear option within weeks of coming to power and its indifference to, if not collusion with, the VHP’s preparations to build a temple in Ayodhya.

On a quick survey, it is obvious that with very few commendable exceptions like the Kalki weekly, most of the Tamil periodicals have welcomed the Indian nuclear explosions, particularly soon after the Pokharan blasts, though they might have had developed a less enthusiastic response after the Pakistani blasts. But on the issue of Ayodhya (which figured a few weeks after the blasts in the wake of the VHP’s statements about the work going on in respect of the temple), several journals have likened it to a "nuclear holocaust in the making".

For instance, in an editorial titled ‘Meendum oru sodhanai’ (Another test), weekly Kumudam (June 19, 1998) notes that, within a few days of India’s explosions and the announcement of sanctions against India by the US, Japan and other countries, "another bomb exploded". "This was not a nuclear bomb. It is the news that work is on again to build a Ram temple at Ayodhya. The Babri Masjid toppled several governments and cruelly took a toll of human lives. The nuclear bomb is a bomb that needs to be exploded but this (communal) bomb must be averted" (Anugundu vedikkavendiya gundu, indha gundu thadukkappadavendiya gundu).

The editorial goes on to call upon the government to prevent this ‘act of fanaticism’ by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad instead of assisting it in its venture. It says people voted for the BJP-led government in the expectation of industrial growth, reduction in unemployment and elimination of poverty but "what prevails is chaos" (Nilavaram kalavaramaga irukkiradhu).

In a similar vein is the snippets column ‘Naiyandi Nallusamy’ (by Mottesh) in ‘Junior Vikatan’ (June 28) which carries the following conversation: "The BJP has affirmed its intention to build a Ram temple in Ayodhya?". Response: "As if nuclear explosion does not suffice, they also seem to be arranging for an earthquake". The popular question-answer column by Arasu in Kumudam (June 25) has the following: Question by a reader: What is likely to be the next bomb? Reply: Ayodhya.

Venerated weekly Kalki, which has consistently taken a stand against nuclear tests by India in contrast to several other Tamil journals, also has likened the emerging communal situation to a nuclear danger. In an editorial (June 7) focussing on the aggressive and militaristic pronouncements of Defence Minister George Fernandes and others on India reserving its right to use the nuclear weapon and Indian armed forces learning the use of the weapons, the weekly refers to deepening penetration of ISI-Pakistani agents and adds: "To make matters worse, another very big nuclear explosion has taken place: the biggest of them all (Nilamaiyai mosamakka innoru maaperum anugundu veditthirukkiradhu! Yellavatraiyum vida periya gundu!) -- the decision to go ahead with the building of the Ram Temple in Ayodhya". The edit goes on to warn of serious internal disturbances in the wake of the VHP programme and asks, "Which nuclear weapon will help foil internal turmoil or extremist penetration?".

In other columns like the question-answer one, Kalki criticises the Prime Minister’s call to residents of Pokharan not to mind the adverse effects of radiation "in the national interest" and calls the nuclear adventure an exercise to strengthen the party’s political position. In an issue of the weekly featuring an interview with T.N. Seshan, an idol of several admirers of the BJP, the former Chief Election Commissioner says in reply to a question on Pokharan: "Though steel is strong, none can become strong by swallowing a piece of steel." While asserting that nuclear tests will in no way help India’s economy and pointing to Pakistan’s blasts in the wake of Pokharan II, he adds that at best the latter can take credit for shoring up India’s self-esteem.

It is strange that several journals have missed the BJP’s ideological motivation in conducting nuclear explosions within weeks of coming to power, though enough pronouncements had been made by spokesmen of the Sangh Parivar about the Indian blasts being an assertion of `national pride’ rather than a result of a strategic/security review.

For instance, `Junior Vikatan’ (June 21), in its `Newsroom’ column, reports a speech made by Ramagopalan, Hindu Munnani leader, at the `Bheemarathasanthi’ festival at Melur, where he recalled how Hanuman first doubted his capacity to cross the sea and find Sita in captivity in Sri Lanka.. Ram, however, insisted on his going on the mission, and Hanuman realised his own `extraordinary strength’ only when he went to Lanka and met Sita. "In the same manner, through the nuclear tests, the world will understand what the strength of Hindus and Indians is", the column quotes the Hindu Munnani leader as saying.

Amidst the not very considered assessment of nuclear weaponry and the lack of awareness of their danger to humanity displayed by several Tamil periodicals, Kalki stands out not only for its consistent condemnation of Pokharan II but also for the lucid and telling argumentation behind its editorial stance. In its editorial (May 24) titled "Pokharan victory is a defeat for the PM", it questions the need to "prove" again what was proved by the first Pokharan blast of 1974 (India’s capability to make the bomb). Emphasising that India had lost the moral standing to say proudly that it was abstaining from exercising the nuclear option despite having the capability to do so in the interest of world peace, the editorial points out that, since the use of the nuclear weapon would be the last resort in any conflict, the expenditure on other weaponry cannot be reduced (as some protagonists of nuclear weaponisation have claimed).

The Tamil media support (clearly, a predominantly large section of periodical journalism in Tamil, catering to a wide segment of readership, supported the Pokharan blasts) rested essentially on two counts: 1) The blasts are an act of national and scientific achievement; 2) They are an act of defiance of Big Powers whose double standards and nuclear hegemony have been exposed by India through the tests. Some monthlies, too, have editorially welcomed the nuclear tests as a show of India’s sense of pride and defiance of Western double standards.

The editorials in favour of the blasts, sometimes containing contradictions in their claims and in almost all cases failing to substantiate even briefly or in passing the assumptions behind the support, have voiced a concern for peace and a commitment to peace on India’s behalf in issues of journals published after the Pakistani blasts which followed the Indian tests.

In its editorial (June 5), Kumkumam says that, through the Pokharan blasts, India had, as noted earlier by it, demonstrated that it was a `big power’, (recalling with pride that a `majority’ of nuclear scientists involved in the tests hailed from Tamil Nadu). That neither India nor Pakistan has achieved a decent level of human development of their populations and that both stood at the bottom the ranking in the quality of life of their peoples seemed to have been ignored in deciding that a nation is a `big power’. Similarly is ignored the fact that nuclear explosion is several decades-old technology, and that India could pride itself on a more sophisticated achievement in technological terms in using nuclear energy for power generation.

The same editorial, however, goes on to raise doubts about the BJP’s motive in exercising the nuclear option. Referring to a statement by spokesmen of the RSS that India should have conducted the tests in 1996 itself and that it could not do so because the BJP was in power for a very short time then, it says, "this raises fear and doubt in us. Has the BJP gone in for the tests to glorify itself?" The editorial proceeds to say that, "having shown the world who we are", all that India had to show was that it was peace-loving and would make "any sacrifice to ensure world peace".

Two successive editorials in weekly Saavi reveal the pitfalls of such a subjective attitude to the nuclear issue without regard to demands of security or consideration of the extraordinary (viz. Genocidal) nature of nuclear weapons in contrast to conventional weapons of war and defence.

Calling upon scientists (Vigyanigale, vaarungal) to accept garlands (for the Pokharan blasts), the Saavi editorial says those countries which all along "looked down on India" and nourished "stereotyped images" of the country (snake-charmers, sanyasis, and astrologers), had now been made to "look up" at this country.

It proclaims confidently that India’s bomb is not aimed at creating another Hiroshima or Nagasaki and says that, "despite knowing this", some countries had imposed economic sanctions on India. "We shall accept the challenge and use this opportunity to show that we can stand on our own legs". It adds.

In a subsequent editorial (June 11), published after the Pakistani blasts and titled `We will strike back, but will not strike first’ (Badhiladi tharuvom, mudhaladi tharamattom), Saavi says the world witnessed the "viswaroopam" that India had shown "rising from the craters of Pokharan" and was astonished and even shuddered at this. The editorial faults the US and other countries for not taking India at its word, as pronounced by the Prime Minister, that the country had no intention to produce another Hiroshima. "What such a stance betrays is not doubts about India’s sincerity but heartburning (yerichchal) that India had risen to equal heights and was proclaiming that it was a power on a par with them", Saavi adds, claiming, like many other journals, that the blasts had made a huge difference to India’s status.

It was in view of India’s rejection of US double standards (in maintaining its own huge nuclear arsenal) that this country was "neither surprised nor frightened" by the Pakistani blasts, says Saavi and expresses the hope that the BJP government would seriously undertake measures to ensure good relations with Pakistan and China. "All concerned are interested in ensuring that neighbours do not get into conflicts" ("Andainadugal sandainadugalaaga vidakkoodadhu"). These two editorials, while equating nuclear explosions with a big-power status, also assume that pronouncements of peaceful `intentions’ are enough to reduce danger to this region and the world from nuclear weaponisation and that the 24-years-old erstwhile policy of keeping the nuclear option open was based on fear and was not a well-considered strategic and moral stance.

Several journals have harped on the theme of self-righteous "defiance" of big powers by India despite the fact that the very first official announcement of Pokharan II on May 11, 1998, mentioned India’s willingness to move towards signing the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), which India had till then exposed as a tool to preserve the nuclear hegemony of big powers and an alibi for failure to take sincere steps towards genuine nuclear disarmament.

Another common feature of most editorial comments is that the economic implications of a nuclear weapons programme, of even minimum deterrence and command-control-delivery systems that would be inevitable in the sub-continent in the wake of the end of nuclear `virginity’, do not even find a mention in them. Monthly Mullaicharam (July ), while supporting Pokharan II along lines taken by most publications, also mentions the dangers arising from the fact that the "buttons" (triggers) of nuclear weapons are within the reach of the Presidents/Prime Ministers of India, Pakistan and China. However, it says "the world knows" that India will not launch the weapons against anyone first and wonders whether the "enemy", too, will have the same sagacity (Yedhirikkum andha pakkuvam varavendume?).

It is perhaps extraordinary faith that inspires such a confidence about the safety of nuclear weapons in the hands of leadership(s) in India if one considers the closeness of organisations like the VHP, RSS and Bajrang Dal to the powers-that-be and their world outlook, historiography and depredations. It is also forgotten that the only instance of the nuclear bomb being dropped on people, causing enormous human tragedy at the end of World War II, was occasioned by geopolitics and the game of hegemony. Hence, irrespective of who happens to be in power, the nuclear terror cannot perhaps be eliminated without understanding and tackling forces that drive nation –states towards hegemony and imperialism. In the overall picture presented by several Tamil periodicals, a mixed assessment emerges: the media in Tamil Nadu, while approving the BJP’s exercise of the nuclear option, are fortunately aware at least of the danger to social peace and the country itself from the communal politics of the VHP-BJP- RSS, though the alliance in which the BJP was a partner won big victories in the Lok Sabha polls in Tamil Nadu not long ago. This, one supposes, is at least in substantial part due to the fact that people of Tamil Nadu (unlike people in the North, especially Delhi and Punjab, affected by the trauma of the Partition), have had decades of experience of peaceful and harmonious existence of followers of different religions till majoritarian communal forces entered the scene in this State openly in the eighties and expanded their space through the politics of Meenakshipuram, Vinayaka Chathurthi and Ayodhya aimed at provoking the minorities.

But a large section of the media have not seriously examined what Pokharan II was aimed at provoking -- national/religious chauvinism or national unity and consensus on issues of international peace and security. The journals also have not addressed with required objectivity and depth the question whether Pokharan II was a step towards global disarmament or intensification of the arms race in the subcontinent.

The theme has tended to die away in Tamil periodicals, with follow-up features being restricted, in the aftermath of the blasts, to individual and family portraits of leading Indian nuclear scientists. There has been little attempt at assessment of events after the blasts.