"There are 2 Gujarats", That is a weak argument

The cardinal rule of sections in the media is two bifurcate anything and everything as long as it proves the point. ‘Two Indias’, ‘Two As’ or ‘Two Bs’- a make believe distinction becomes the basis of a weak argument. It has been made to believe that there exist not one but 2 Gujarats. One is the shiny Ahmedabad, the Vibrant Gujarat and the other Gujarat that lives in ‘tiny unkempt Muslim lanes’.

The reality is that there exists only one Gujarat. 2 or 3 Gujarats existed back in the 1980s when governments invented concoctions such as KHAM just so that they can retain power. Reservation politics were used, misused and abused but as long as it upheld the unhealthy status quo it was accepted. Sadly, all that has now changed.

In virtually every sphere Gujarat has outshined others. Known for its industry Gujarat surprised critics when it attained 11 % agriculture growth. The farmer is progressing as much as the trader, a resident of Kutch as the same joy in his life as a resident of Surat and the Muslim of Gujarat is as secure as the Hindu. Was there any violence after the Akshardham attack or the 26/7 blasts? This talk of ‘2 Gujarats’ takes absurdities to new heights.

Government's refusal to apologise

Lastly, repeated lies is fed through television screens and newspapers that the Government has refused to apologize. Not once but many times Narendra Modi has said he could be hanged if he is found guilty. Repeatedly he has expressed anguish over what has happened. And in any case, his track record proves best that 2002 was not the rule but the exception. There are no riots or cases of 144 ever since. Is this not a manifestation of Narendra Modi’s sincerity to protect 6 crore Gujaratis irrespective of their caste, creed or religion?

On the question of the apology two examples need to be scrutinized. First is the often-quoted Manmohan Singh apology of 2009. Yes he apologized but after 25 whole years and after unleashing a wave of discord in Punjab even after Blue Star or Delhi Riots of 1984. Does mere lip service after 25 years and contradictory actions qualify as an ‘aplogy’?

Second is the case of Sri Lanka. After the worst anti-Tamil pogrom in 1983, Chandrika Kumaratunga ‘apologized’ to the community in 2003. But was there a halt in hostilities between 1983 and 2003 or 2003 and till the present? Has the ‘apology’ reduced the violence? What is the point of apologizing when the intent is mala fide?

Gujarat is an expectation even in this count. The Government of the day has shown its competence not by falling in traps such of apologies that are nothing apart from symbolism but by showing to the world that wounds can be healed through inclusive development and nothing else. If this was not the case why did Kathlal, a predominantly Muslim seat give a resounding mandate to the BJP in a bye-election? Where were the apologists then?

To create and fall for stereotypes is the worst thing can happen to a liberal and thinking democracy such as ours. The media has a duty towards responsibly carrying news and public opinion to our homes. Sadly, this is not happening in Gujarat. One can only hope if there must be reconciliation, it begins in the media studios so that nothing more than the truth reach our homes.