COMMENTARY
SPECIALS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA
ARCHIVES

The Rediff Interview/Pritish Nandy

'I am not representing the interests of Hindutva, I am not standing for Hindutva'

I have not joined the Shiv Sena, I have only been asked by them to become one of the nominated members to represent Maharashtra," clairifies Pritish Nandy, arguably India's bestknown journalist, of his surprise decision to contest next week's Rajya Sabha election from Maharashtra. Surprise, because, throughout his career as editor, Nandy had been a flag-bearer of the liberal forces, and in particular critical of the Hindutva brand of politics.

After a long wait in his anteroom, Syed Firdaus Ashraf managed to pin down Nandy, 51, on what prompted him to enter politics, and what it means for his journalism. Photographs: Jewella C Miranda.

What prompted you to join politics, take up the Sena's cause in particular?

I have been a poet for about ten years of my life. In 1982, when I was around 30, 31 years old, I left Calcutta. I left poetry and came to Bombay with a belief that media, journalism, could help me contribute to the making of a modern India. And, I did that for 15 years. For 15 years, I sat on this side. Criticised governments, criticised policies, criticised those who are responsible for bringing India to where it is today.

When the Sena invited me to enter the Rajya Sabha, the House of Elders, I didn't have to fight an election for it. I thought it would be somewhat stupid and unfair for me to say 'no' because I have spent all my life just criticising others and not trying to do things which would change India for the better.

Does your decision mean you will stop writing and being a journalist?

I will not stop writing. I was a journalist and will continue to be one. Since my nomination, I have written two columns. One was against the bomb and today it's against Swadeshi. The very fact that I am being backed by the BJP-Shiv Sena has not stopped me from expressing my opinion.

Why did you opt for the Sena? Can you describe the meeting between you and Bal Thackeray that led to this decision?

I didn't opt for the Sena, they offered me a seat. So I accepted it. I have met Balasaheb Thackeray several times in different contexts. And when he asked me whether I would represent Maharashtra in the Rajya Sabha, I said okay.

So there was no meeting as such between the two of you?

No, there was no meeting specifically to discuss this issue.

So how exactly did Thackeray make you an offer?

One day before I filed my nomination, Thackeray called me and asked if I would like to become a Rajya Sabha member. I said I will think about it. And then I called him back and said, yes.

Why did other parties not make you an offer?

No, many parties at various stages talked to me. But nobody offered me anything in writing. So, I said yes to Thackeray.

If, say, Mulayam Singh Yadav had approached you, would you have accepted his nomination?

Mulayam Singh did speak to me, but he did not make me an offer. Many people from different parties spoke to me. Everybody spoke to me at some stage or the other.

So why didn't it materialise?

I don't know. I didn't pursue it. I never asked for it.

Do you think it is ethical to enter the Rajya Sabha? Surely, it is not the same as contesting elections and entering the Lok Sabha?

I am not a politician. I am entering the Rajya Sabha as a journalist. As an independent-minded journalist, I have been invited by one of the political parties to represent the interests of the state in Parliament.

You mean you are entering the Rajya Sabha to represent the interests of Maharashtra, and not of the Sena?

Maharashtra and Mumbai. Why of the Shiv Sena? The fact that you are a member of a party is secondary and irrelevant. What is important to me is the causes that I will be representing in Parliament.

Can you identify some causes?

My interest is in media and journalism, communication. So my areas of specialisation will be that. I will try and strengthen an independent press. I will try and make it possible that journalists don't have to be a part of government machinery as in Doordarshan. And also not be a part of moneybag machinery, as in all over India.

Do you completely agree with the concept of Hindutva?

I am not representing the interests of Hindutva. I am not standing for Hindutva. I am standing as a nominated member of the Rajya Sabha. To me, I will be happy to defend Hindutva if you ask me to. But the point is -- it is a separate issue altogether. I am being asked to represent a state in Parliament. Whoever might have invited me to represent the state does not necessarily mean that I will have to conform to their every belief.

So what does Hindutva mean to you?

I think Hindutva in India means resurgent Hinduism. The desire of the Indian people to feel that there is a common bond that unites the entire nation. We as a nation are driven by multiple castes, communities, multiple interests and religions. And nothing holds this nation together.

That is why in this nation you have never had an uprising. The peasants have never staged an uprising. Nobody has staged an uprising in our country, why? Because everybody's interests are disparate, broken and small. Therefore, for the first time, I feel the BJP was able to do a bonding exercise by creating something that unifies the nation. You may agree with it. You may disagree with it. But the fact is that it unifies a substantial part of India, it is a fact that history will accept.

How will you then define secularism?

Secularism is also coexistence. I don't believe in Nehruvian secularism which is absence of religion. I believe in Gandhian secularism. The presence of all religions with harmony.

Bal Thackeray has been openly stating that he was proud of his boys who demolished the Babri Masjid. Do you subscribe to this affirmation?

No, that is his statement.

When did you join the Shiv Sena?

(Immediately) I am not joining any party. Let me make it clear. They have supported my candidature for the Rajya Sabha. That does not mean that I endorse every view of theirs. Secondly, about the demolition of the Babri Masjid. That statement was made by Balasaheb Thackeray. Whether the Shiv Sainiks actually demolished the Babri Masjid or not is still a matter of speculation. He was making a point. In other words, he says that if his people had done it, he would have supported it.

What do you think should be done with the disputed site in Ayodhya?

I believe we should do what the courts want to.

Everyone knows what role the Shiv Sena played in the Bombay riots of 1992-93. In fact, you had written a beautiful article about the Muslim jawan whose house was burnt down, in The Sunday Observer when you were its editor. You had also mentioned how the secular fabric of Bombay city was torn in the riots. How could you then join the Sena when you knew of their role in the Bombay riots?

Let me clear it once again. I have not joined the party. They have supported my candidature for the Rajya Sabha. The point is, what are you giving value to. Are you giving value to what every supporter, anybody who endorses your candidature stands for? Or, are you giving value to what you have set out to meet? I can play a meaningful role even in the Shiv Sena, even one man can change attitudes if you feel that attitude is wrong.

Therefore, if you say on one hand that such and such party has done things which is not right, why are you joining the party? That means you want to say that nobody wants to change the attitude and perspective. We all spend our lives trying to inform, educate and persuade others. That's our job. All journalists are persuaders. I am just another one of them.

Pritish Nandy, continued