BY APURVA RAI
THE dust refuses to settle
down as the opinion that people have formed over India or the Bharat. Why not
India and Bharat, may I say. Seeds of division have been sowed and the
germination process has begun. Can’t say how big the tree will grow. But I am
sure this tree will never give rest or peace.
The month of September 2023 will go down in Indian
history when President Droupadi Murmu was described as President of Bharat
instead of President of India at an official dinner organised at the international
summit of G-20 nations in New Delhi. Even Prime Minister Narendra Mode sat
behind a placard reading “Bharat” and not India as has been the practice
hitherto. Many were shocked, dismayed and confused. Has the Narendra Modi
government done what was least expected— changing the name of the nation from
India to Bharat. An intense debate took place. History was dug. Arguments were
given; and articles were written. Likes and dislikes started pouring in from all
quarters. A new debate was taking place in India for a new Bharat.
In the new atmosphere if you don’t use Bharat for your
beloved country you are not patriotic by any means; a true Indian can’t be a
true Bharatiya! Those who still had some liking for India were branded as having a colonial
mentality and being slaves to the foreign culture. I understood it like that.
Logic, fact and mind said there is nothing bad or
nothing wrong in accepting Bharat and dumping India. But somewhere there existed a
void. Emotions were attached to India and heart lived in India. Logic is not
needed always. Facts are fine but still…
By now almost every one of us has mugged up what is
stated in our Constitution. On September 18, 1949, the chief architect of the
Constitution B R Ambedkar moved to amend Article 1, which states: “India, that
is Bharat, shall be a union of States”. Let
us also know what the initial draft of Article 1 read: India shall be a Union of
States. There was a strong debate about replacing Bharat with India. The final version
that we have before us is what Ambedkar had moved. At the same time, Ambedkar also
said that the word Bharat was accepted and that we should move on to bigger
issues.
Things were settled. A calm prevailed. Bonhomie spread.
While the nation moved on suddenly reverse gear was applied and the debate
sparked off to replace India with Bharat. No bill was presented in Parliament,
no debate, no plebiscite, no discussion, and no idea to
the people of the country when everyone witnesses a new change. Whose idea was it anyway? Was it the ruling BJP government? Was the BJP behind it? Was Prime Minister Narendra Modi behind it?
Suspense continues.
Several quarters echoed their voice that ‘India’ indicates the colonial mindset. An opinion was formed to reject what was prevalent during the British Raj and to adopt what is our own. The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) chief Mohan Bhagwat had said in Guwahati sometime ago to stop using the name ‘India’ and switch to ‘Bharat’, our own desi word. Better late than never, you know.
Many of those protesting against the English forgot
how proudly do we announce when our children get Rhodes or Chevening
scholarships. How much pride they take in getting British Council membership!
How can one deny the fact that Oxford still commands more respect in our hearts
than any other of our own university? Our own children put in more efforts in
learning English, the colonial language, and qualifying IELTS to gain admission
to their university. One should not forget that the Allahabad University is
also called the ‘Oxford of the East’. Hamara seena 56 inch ka ho jata hai
(our chest blows to 56 inches) when it comes to anything that is English.
There is nothing wrong in Bharat either. Those who
stand in support are seen as deeply connected to their culture, the history,
the roots and having faith in traditions. Historians have yet to find convincing
evidence to support the change. The house is divided.
It is not that names have not been changed. Who can forget Calcutta becoming Kolkata, Bangalore becoming Bengaluru, Madras becoming Chennai, Cawnpore becoming Kanpur, Allahabad becoming Prayagraj, Gauhati becoming Guwahati and Bombay becoming Mumbai. But nobody had the slightest inkling that the name Bharat will be officially replaced by India at an international event! The whole world saw it. The whole world experienced it. A mahabharat was triggered over nomenclature.
What is wrong with having two names? Several other
countries, too, have it. Turkey is known as Turkiye, the German name of Germany
is Deutschland and Japan is the English name Nippon. So why should India which
is Bharat affect so much? How can one forget Ceylon becoming Sri Lanka, though
Ceylon is etched in our memories for its radio and Ameen Sayani giving his
inimitable voice. Burma is now Myanmar though many of us still call it by its
older name.
By any standards hybrid use of the name sounds
strange. “President of the Republic of Bharat” does not go as good as the
“President of the Republic of India”. Well, it could read, “Bharat ke
Rashtrapati” and nobody would have found anything odd. Afterall, we all
know Japan as a leading country in automobile manufacturing and understand that
Nippon is merely a brand that manufactures several electric goods. We all talk
of going to Germany to see the Berlin Wall and are familiar with Deutsche Bank
as a bank.
FEAR OF UNITED OPPOSITION
What, then, led to this so-called new namkaran
(a ritual when we give a name to a newborn in the family) controversy? Was it
cultural, historical, mythological or followed the lost traditions? None. It
was purely political.
When the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) came to power
with a whopping majority there was no debate over Bharat or India. When the
Modi government was re-elected in 2019 there was, again, no issue like Bharat
or India. Then what happened so suddenly? Was there any threat? Was there any
scare? Was there any debate? Was there any answerability to someone? If not,
then why so much brouhaha and that too when the country is preparing for the next
big elections next year, i.e. 2024.
The root cause of the whole debate lies in the fact
that prime opposition parties of the country have rechristened their alliance
as the Indian National Development Inclusive Alliance or I.N.D.I.A., in short. So
far, it was known as the United Progressive Alliance or the UPA formed after
the 2004 general elections and was led by the Indian National Congress, the party
that we call as Congress. Rahul Gandhi was the face and continues to be so. He
continues to lead the newly-named alliance.
The acronym I.N.D.I.A. has done ‘wonders’ for the freshly united opposition. They were sinking and needed it badly. The target, Modi government, was hit. The dart was sharp on the dot. To quote Rahul Gandhi “that got them all heated up”. The Modi government is hunting for the Sanjeevni Booti (the remedial herbal treatment plant described in ‘Ramayana’). Does it have a Hanuman to rush and bring a whole lot of relief? Alas, not! Ironically, in the BJP Modi is Ram, Modi is Laxman and he is Hanuman. Modi is the face, Modi is the savior.
The biggest failure of Narendra Modi, in the past 10
years, is that he never encouraged talent. It is not that there is any dearth
of it. But Modi is the face. He is the ruler. He is the government. He is the
party. He is the ringmaster. He is the striker and he is the goalkeeper. Modi
is the pilot. He is the co-pilot and the navigator.
The opposition had the pulse. It knows how BJP and RSS
project themselves as the guardians of nationalism, Hindi, Hindu and Hindutva,
Bharat and Bharatiyata and the guardians of pracheen Bharatiya
Sanskriti. And if you disagree, they lose no time branding you
anti-national.
The I.N.D.I.A. acronym was the answer to this
narrative. However, it is debatable how correct it is to use the country’s name
as an acronym.
For the united opposition, Congress, in particular,
half the battle is won.
Short of any other idea to counter the opposition move
Modi government decided to use Bharat, instead of India, at a major
international event. A unilateral decision, indeed.
An undeterred Rahul says, “The Constitution actually
uses both names, right? The line in the Constitution, which I began with, is
‘India, that is Bharat, shall be a Union of States’. So, I don’t really see a
problem… both are perfectly acceptable.” He further added, “But, I think, maybe
we irritated the government a little because we named our coalition I.N.D.I.A.
and that got them all heated up. And now they have decided to change the name
of the country.”
POLL PLANK?
The BJP seems to be losing the battle; though nobody
can predict whether the party will win the war since the elections are still
several months away. The BJP, as a party and the ruling government, never
looked so shaken. They were confident of returning to a third term in 2024. Now
the scenario has changed. The party has revived an old debate on nomenclature
and played the nationalist card with it. Emotions run high and opinions swirl
around it.
For every Indian, both Bharat and India have been the most loved ones. Both the names have been interchangeably used on every platform. India remains as much in the hearts of its people as Bharat. So far no problem. The problem will crop if the BJP comes with its unilateral decision and removes India to pave the way for Bharat. What will, then, happen to AIIMS (All India Institute of Medical Sciences)? Will it be known as the All Bharat Institute of Medical Sciences (ABIMS)? What will happen to the prestigious IAS? Will it be known as Bharat Administrative Services (BAS)? What will be the Indian Air Force known as, Bharat Air Force? And Indian Navy, Bharat Navy?
The nation knows Bharat is as good as India. Perfect
and full of patriotism. We say ‘Bharat Mata ki Jai’ with as much pride
as ‘Chak de India’.
There is always a second opinion. Think before making
the change. Think before the topsy-turvy.