Library
|
Sir Mark Tully
Would Indira Gandhi not have been assassinated? Obviously there would
have been no pogrom in 1984, but would India be very different today?
The most obvious assumption to make is that if the army had not mounted
Operation Bluestar, Indira Gandhi would not have been assassinated by
her Sikh bodyguards. But I’m not sure we can go on from that to assume
that there would not have been other attempts on her life by Sikhs. So
much would have depended on what she would have done to regain control
of the Golden Temple from Bhindranwale if she hadn’t ordered the army
action. I just don’t buy the theory that she didn’t give that order. The
Indian army is far too disciplined to have undertaken such a major
operation without clear orders from the highest authority.
What I do believe is that neither she nor indeed any of her generals
thought the operation would cause such devastation. Nevertheless she
knew the risks involved in any military operation in the Golden Temple,
she realised the outrage there would be in the Sikh community, and so
the fact that she ordered Bluestar suggests that she felt she had no
alternative.
But as we are in the business of suppositions, of hypothetical
questions, let’s suppose Indira Gandhi had baulked at Bluestar, what
then? Indira Gandhi could have delayed taking action against
Bhindranwale yet again but she realised voters were beginning to believe
she lacked the will to act. In her broadcast to the nation before the
operation started, the prime minister said, "an impression has been
assiduously created that Punjab is not being dealt with", and that was
not an impression she wanted to give with a general election on the
horizon. If she had still delayed, it would probably have meant having
to take even more drastic action later. I suppose it was just possible
that the Akali leaders might have listened to the appeal Indira Gandhi
made in that broadcast and called off their morcha. But they would not
have been able to pull her chestnuts out of the fire because they had
lost all influence over Bhindranwale. Supposing Indira Gandhi had
listened to those advisors who recommended laying siege to the Golden
Temple to starve Bhindranwale and his men, would she then have avoided
arousing the wrath of the more militant members of the Sikh community
and putting her life in danger? Almost certainly not. In the
supercharged atmosphere created by the Akali morcha, Sikhs would
probably have marched on Amritsar, with consequences even graver than
the snap military operation Indira Gandhi believed she was being
offered. That was certainly the view of the intelligence services and
that was why the army was told that Bluestar must be short and sharp.
So even if there had been no Operation Bluestar, it’s difficult to see
how Indira Gandhi could have avoided putting her life at risk. But
putting her life at risk didn’t necessarily mean she would have been
killed. If she had not ignored the advice to remove all Sikhs from her
bodyguards or if her assassins’ plot had been foiled, Indira Gandhi
would not have died on October 31, 1984. India’s immediate history would
then have been very different. The massacre of Sikhs that followed her
assassination would not have occurred. But what about the longer term?
What about India now, would it be very different? I am not so sure. At
the time many prophesied that Bluestar and those massacres would achieve
Bhindranwale’s ambition of driving a permanent wedge between Sikhs and
Hindus. They have not. There were plenty of Cassandras who prophesied
that after Indira no one else would be able to hold India together. They
too have proved false prophets.
Many in the Congress party would like to think that they would still be
the undisputed rulers of India if Indira Gandhi had not died. I don’t
believe that to be true. The decline of the Congress party is Indira’s
legacy. Her Emergency reminded voters how precious their rights were,
and so they were no longer prepared to accept the inevitability of any
party coming to power.
At the same time, Indira Gandhi’s strategy of forming caste alliances
had created the very politics which was to undermine it in its own
northern bastions of Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. One Jagjivan Ram was not
enough to convince Dalits that the Congress was their party, and anyhow
Indira lost him after the Emergency. Her second term in office was
dominated by the third factor which has undermined her party’s monopoly
of power—regionalism. Indira’s belief that more not less centralisation
was the answer to regionalism created disasters in Punjab and Kashmir,
and the collapse of her party’s southern fortress, Andhra Pradesh.
Instead of curbing regionalism, she set India on the path of general
elections in which state rather than national issues matter and
coalition governments are the outcome.
I used to think that 1984 was the most momentous year of my long stay in
India. Now I wonder whether India would be a very different place if
Bluestar, the mutinies by Sikh soldiers, Indira Gandhi’s assassination,
the Sikh massacres, the installation of a prime minister who had never
held any ministerial office, and the Bhopal gas disaster had not taken
place. Looking back on that year, my image of India is reinforced. I
have always seen her as a mighty ocean liner. She is sometimes tossed
about by winds, and rolls and pitches in seas which would sink a
smaller, less stable vessel, but she weathers the storm, and sails on.
If all those storms the liner sailed through in one short year have had
no lasting impact on her, I am tempted to say that the answer to that
question ‘what would have happened in India if?’ will always be a dull
‘what did happen anyhow’.
|