top of page

By:

Abhiram Ghadyalpatil

10 May 2026 at 12:01:04 pm

Can Muslims Reimagine the BJP?

As the BJP expands its political dominance, Indian Muslims need to rethink old electoral assumptions in engaging with the BJP. It is fascinating to read Arvind Singh’s ‘India’s Rogue Historians: How They Fought Hindus at Ayodhya & Lost’ (Redux Publications) in the context of the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s recent Bhojshala judgment. Singh, in his 830-page tome, explains how India’s Muslims, persuaded by the cohort of Marxist historians, squandered every opportunity to reconcile with the Hindu...

Can Muslims Reimagine the BJP?

As the BJP expands its political dominance, Indian Muslims need to rethink old electoral assumptions in engaging with the BJP. It is fascinating to read Arvind Singh’s ‘India’s Rogue Historians: How They Fought Hindus at Ayodhya & Lost’ (Redux Publications) in the context of the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s recent Bhojshala judgment. Singh, in his 830-page tome, explains how India’s Muslims, persuaded by the cohort of Marxist historians, squandered every opportunity to reconcile with the Hindu side’s religious, historical, and legal claim over Ram Mandir in Ayodhya. In November 2019, when the Supreme Court (SC) awarded the entire site to the Hindus to build the temple to Lord Ram, it only built on a series of legal interventions including the 1994 SC judgment which ruled that “a mosque is not an essential part of the practice of the religion of Islam”. Singh writes that right from 1858 when the then caretaker of the mosque filed the first complaint seeking an order restraining Hindus from praying inside the ‘mosque’ which the Muslim complainant himself mentioned as ‘janmasthan’, Ayodhya presented innumerable opportunities to the Muslims to accept the religious, historical, archaeological, and legal superiority of the Hindu claim over the site. Throughout the legal trajectory of the Ayodhya case post-independence, India’s ‘eminent historians’ took it upon themselves to represent the Muslim side and effectively stopped them from reaching any legal or out-of-court settlement, reconciliation, or just a pragmatic acknowledgement of the merit in the Hindu side’s claim which the SC upheld in 2019. Rogue Historians Singh’s account is an instructive read about the Hindu side’s nearly 500-year old struggle to reclaim Ayodhya, particularly the post-independence era, against all odds including the narrative war that “India’s rogue historians” fought on behalf of the Muslims but lost eventually, in the context of two recent developments- one, the Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) victory in West Bengal and Assam elections that has triggered a curiously cynical response that Muslims do not matter any longer to the BJP. Two—and a more direct outcome of the 2019 Ayodhya verdict itself—the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s judgment declaring the Bhojshala complex in MP’s Dhar district a “temple to goddess Saraswati”. The MP HC based its judgment on the 10-points emanating from the Ayodhya verdict. It also ruled that the 1991 Places of Worship Act, widely cited by the entire spectrum of Muslim petitioners to politicians to “secular” parties to the “eminent historians”, did not apply to the Bhojshala temple as it was a “protected monument” under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act of 1958, a set of monuments the Places of Worship Act does not apply to. The argument that the Muslims do not matter to the BJP has not been made for the first time nor are we likely to see this reductionist tendency to interpret India die down anytime soon. The BJP has won Bengal and retained Assam with even higher numbers despite the unfavourable demographics in many constituencies in these states. It indeed is a paradigm electoral shift in the sense that the BJP has finally denied the Muslim vote bank, if not the Muslims, the exercise of its veto power. In several state and national elections, the Muslim vote bank, and the fantastically self-styled secular parties who court this vote bank, have exercised this veto power to either deny the BJP a majority or even a shot at power. Assam and West Bengal have changed this and hence the cynical argument that the Muslims (not just Muslim voters) do not matter to the BJP any longer. Cynical Template Why always use this reductionist template which gives just one task to the Muslims - defeat the BJP in elections? Why not ask Muslims to take a chance on the BJP and vote for it? Given the viscerally polarised political atmosphere it probably is a big ask of the Muslims. But in that shines a political opportunity that has the potential to change this very cynical ‘BJP versus Muslims’ template of Indian politics. A suggestion has been made that all non-BJP parties build a coalition of Hindu voters and Muslims to take on the BJP. But in order to build that Hindu-Muslim coalition, won’t these non-BJP parties have to give up at least some, if not all, of their nauseatingly Muslim-appeasing politics? There is absolutely no sign that the non-BJP parties are even thinking on these lines. But the Muslims already have an electoral choice in the BJP. Like any other successful political party in a democracy, the BJP caters to its constituency, which effectively is the Hindu constituency. With West Bengal and Assam, the BJP’s Hindu consolidation is at its peak. So, there is no electoral incentive for the BJP at least in near future to change this Hindu maximisation matrix. But there is an incentive for the Muslims to consider the BJP as an option- it has the potential to make them stakeholders in BJP’s reign and perhaps incentivise the BJP to speak to the Muslims without appeasement. Can the Indian Muslims be politically bold and creative to take a bet on the BJP? A large part of the answer lies in the Bhojshala judgment. A court has just pronounced the structure as a temple to Saraswati based on the solid archaeological, historical, and religious evidence. The Muslim clergy and politicians have reacted exactly in the same manner they did to the Ayodhya ruling. Seven years after the epic Ayodhya judgment, a splendid Ram Mandir stands on the site taking nothing away from the Indian Muslims. Can the Indian Muslims distinguish themselves from their clergy and political leadership this time around and revisit some of their positions in an India that looks vastly different from what it did in 1992 or even 2019? (The author is a senior journalist and Executive Director of Rambhau Mhalgi Prabodhini. Views personal.)

NCP releases separate manifesto than Mahayuti’s

On a sticky wicket, Ajit Pawar chooses home turf Baramati for presenting his vision before the familiar voters


Mahayuti

Mumbai: The NCP led by Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar on Wednesday unveiled its manifesto for the state assembly polls, promising to raise the amount of Ladki Bahin scheme's monthly financial assistance to Rs 2,100 from the present Rs 1,500.


For farmers, the party promised to raise the Shetkari Sanman Nidhi scheme amount from Rs 12,000 to Rs 15,000 per year.


The Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) is contesting the November 20 assembly elections as part of the ruling Mahayuti alliance, which also comprises the Shiv Sena and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).


The NCP, which is fighting the elections from 52 constituencies, also unveiled constituency-specific manifestos for all the assembly seats it is contesting.


The manifesto was unveiled separately by party president Ajit Pawar in Baramati, by its state unit president Sunil Tatkare in Mumbai, and working president Praful Patel in Gondia. NCP candidates and local leaders also released the poll manifestos in their respective constituencies.


Pawar unveiled both the party's state-level manifesto and constituency-specific manifesto for Baramati.

Speaking on the occasion, he said, "We will present the New Maharashtra Vision within 100 days of government formation."


In the manifesto, the party promises to increase the amount given to eligible women under the Mukhyamantri Majhi Ladki Bahin Yojana from the existing Rs 1,500 to Rs 2,100 per month.


This initiative will be the largest monthly DBT (direct benefit transfer) in Maharashtra's history providing benefits of Rs 25,000 each per year to over 2.3 crore women, it said.


The manifesto, which gives 11 promises, talks about increasing the old age pension from Rs 1,500 to Rs 2,100 per month.


For farmers, the party has promised to raise the Shetkari Sanman Nidhi from Rs 12,000 to Rs 15,000 per year, combining support from both the central and state governments.


It also talks about waiving the farm loan and giving 20 per cent additional subsidy for all crops sold under the Minimum Support Price (MSP). Besides this, the NCP also gave an assurance of Rs 25000 per hectare bonus for paddy farmers.


"We have resolved to build more than 45,000 'panand' roads in rural parts of Maharashtra. This is the biggest plan to develop the rural agricultural infrastructure," the manifesto reads.


The party's other promises include a commitment to create 2.5 million jobs and provide monthly stipends of Rs 10,000 to 1 million students through training. It also promises Rs 15,000 monthly salary for Anganwadi and ASHA workers, to reduce electricity bills by 30 per cent while prioritising solar and renewable energy.


"We vow to implement measures that will curb the prices of essential commodities, making them more affordable for everyone," the manifesto document said.

Comments

bottom of page