The Eiffel Tower is an unlikely place for a quarrel about religion, gender and multiculturalism. Yet, a private visit by a BAPS delegation has managed to turn one of France’s most recognisable symbols into the setting for one. The controversy deserves neither the reflexive defensiveness of some Indian commentators nor the temptation to turn the conduct of one religious organisation into a verdict on India. During the visit this week by around 100 people associated with BAPS, Eiffel Tower employees claimed their female colleagues were asked to leave their posts or limit their presence as the delegation passed. The tower’s operating company, SETE, subsequently acknowledged that the delegation had requested arrangements limiting interactions with women and admitted that such conditions should not have been accepted. Staff protests then forced the landmark to close temporarily. BAPS, while expressing regret for the distress caused, has said nobody was denied access to the tower. If a religious delegation asks a public institution to remove or conceal female employees because they are women, the request is plainly at odds with the egalitarian principles governing public life in France. BAPS, as an organisation operating in France, has a responsibility to understand that its religious practices cannot automatically be transplanted into every public setting. Private religious observance is one thing; asking a public institution to rearrange its workforce along gender lines is quite another. But the Eiffel Tower management deserves at least as much scrutiny. SETE had the authority to say no. Instead, it accommodated a request that it now concedes should never have been accepted. The subsequent strike was therefore not simply a protest against an awkward religious request. It was also a rebuke to an institution that failed to uphold its own rules and values. This is where the larger argument about multiculturalism becomes relevant. A confident pluralist society does not require every cultural or religious preference to be accommodated. It requires minorities to enjoy freedom of belief while accepting the common civic rules that govern everyone else. At the same time, it would be equally foolish to inflate one extraordinary incident into a judgement on BAPS, Hinduism or India. BAPS operates across several continents, and its women participate in the organisation’s activities, including its international women’s conferences. One controversial request during a half-hour visit cannot erase that broader record any more than the misconduct of a Christian organisation abroad would automatically become a failing of Italy or the Vatican. The Ministry of External Affairs is right to treat the matter as one between the organisations concerned rather than as a diplomatic embarrassment requiring governmental intervention. BAPS France should acknowledge more forthrightly why the request was unacceptable and work to repair the trust it has damaged. The Eiffel Tower management, meanwhile, should explain why it agreed to it in the first place. A pluralist society works only when the boundaries of tolerance apply to institutions as much as to visitors.
Comments