THE denial of a diplomatic visa to Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi by the United States government must have come as a surprise for the Bharatiya Janata Party, to which he belongs. The decision was communicated officially to the Indian government on March 18. The government was quick to issue a strong protest the same day. However, according to reports, the U.S. government had intimated informally the Indian government and Leader of the Opposition L.K. Advani about the impending decision two days earlier.
Ever since the Asian American Hotel Owners Association invited the Gujarat Chief Minster to speak at its annual function, various groups representing human rights activists, academics and professionals of Indian origin had started protesting. They lobbied vigorously, arguing that Narendra Modi was, in the eyes of many Indians, the prime motivator of the communal pogrom in Gujarat in 2002. The reports of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom and the National Human Rights Commission of India, which were critical of Narendra Modi's role in the pogrom, have been cited as reasons for the U.S decision. Interestingly, a few Indian activists had testified before the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom after the Gujarat riots.
Many West European governments had also made it clear to Narendra Modi that he was not welcome in their countries. After Condoleezza Rice took over as the U.S. Secretary of State, one of the first things she did was to appoint a point-person whose only task was to improve the image of the U.S. in the Muslim and the Arab world. After the Gujarat carnage, Narendra Modi had become one of the most recognisable Indian faces in the Arab world. The denial of a visa to Narendra Modi could be part of the U.S. attempts at rectifying its image in the Arab and wider Muslim world. Ironically, Israeli Prime Minster Ariel Sharon, who Narendra Modi used to idolise in his public speeches, will be the personal guest of President George W. Bush at his Texas ranch at the end of March. Sharon was about to be tried by a court in Belgium last year for his role in the massacre of Palestinians in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Lebanon.
MOST political parties have welcomed the Government of India's position on the issue of denial of visa to a serving Chief Minister of a State. The statement issued by the government expressed "its deep concern and regret" and noted that a visa had been requested through a "Note Verbale" to the U.S. Embassy on February 28. The statement emphasised that the U.S. decision "is uncalled for and displays lack of courtesy and sensitivity towards a constitutionally elected Chief Minister of a State of India". The Charge d'Affaires of the U.S. Embassy, Robert Blake, was summoned to South Block to lodge a "strong protest".
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in a statement in the Rajya Sabha declared that the denial meant "a lack of sensitivity and due courtesy to an elected authority". He went on to say that New Delhi respected the "sovereign right" of the U.S. government to grant or refuse visas to any person. However, he emphasised on the floor of the House that India did "not believe it is appropriate to use allegations or anything less than due legal process to make a subjective judgment to question a constitutional authority in India". Most parties supported the Prime Minister's views. However, Samajwadi Party Member of Parliament Shahid Siddiqui said the United Progressive Alliance government was to be blamed, as it had failed to pursue vigorously the legal case against Narendra Modi.
Although the politically beleaguered Chief Minister got formal support from the government at the Centre, it did not stop Congress Ministers such as Shankarsinh Vaghela from welcoming the U.S. government's decision. He said it was "understandable" since the Chief Minister's actions during the 2002 violence were "criminal". Narendra Modi's detractors from within his own party, the BJP in Gujarat, have not been critical of the U.S. decision. Most dissident BJP leaders in Gujarat did not bother to turn up for the rally in the State capital, Gandhinagar, organised to condemn the U.S. action. The rally incidentally was organised on the day the rest of the world was protesting against the U.S. invasion of Iraq on its second anniversary. The BJP, on the other hand, had given specific instructions to its cadre not to raise anti-U.S. or anti-imperialist slogans.
The "Narendra Modi episode" has come as a rude shock for the BJP. Narendra Modi and his cohorts in arms like the Vishwa Hindu Parishad's Praveen Togadia had on virtually every campaign stop during the Gujarat Assembly elections extolled George Bush and Ariel Sharon, hailing them as standard bearers in the new crusade against terrorism and Islam.
Advani was given the red carpet treatment when he visited Washington as Deputy Prime Minster in 2004, despite being one of the prime accused in the Babri Masjid case. "BJP leaders have better relations with the United States. Jaswant Singh and Yashwant Sinha should have better knowledge of why Modi was denied a visa," said the Communist Party of India (Marxist) Member of Parliament Nilotpal Basu. The BJP, whose leadership compared the party to Ariel Sharon's Likud Party and until recently was a votary of a Washington-Tel Aviv-New Delhi axis, is now accusing the U.S. government of hypocrisy. One of the arguments being bandied about is that the Americans have killed more Muslims in Iraq than Hindu fundamentalists have in Gujarat under Modi.
The government has sent another letter, requesting the Bush administration to review its decision. However, the fact of the matter is that not only has Narendra Modi been denied a diplomatic visa but moves are afoot to revoke his tourist/business visa as well. The U.S. decision may also have a domino effect. Many other governments may be emboldened to refuse visas to politicians who had a role in communal bloodletting, which has characterised Indian politics since the early 1990s.
COMMents
COMMents
SHARE