OPINION: Why is Rahul always sulking?

Of late, Gandhi scion Rahul has been in news, mostly for wrong reasons. First, he was convicted in a defamation case, sentenced to two years imprisonment and subsequently disqualified from being a member of Parliament. While he and his supporters screamed 'vendetta vendetta', a Session court stayed the sentence - underlining the fact that the matter was strictly between the accused and courts, and the State had nothing to do with it.

In his first press conference on 25th last month after his disqualification from the Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi said, "My name is not Savarkar, my name is Gandhi and Gandhis don't apologise." He was answering a question on apologising for his comments.

On its very face, Rahul's bravado is hollow, loaded with arrogance and ignorance. For one, Rahul is not a Gandhi that he is alluding to be. He has no relationship, whatsoever, with Mahatma Gandhi or, for that matter, any Gandhi. Moreover, he has apologised on a few occasions earlier, when cornered.

In May 2019, Rahul Gandhi, who was then the Congress president, submitted an "unconditional apology" in the Supreme Court for attributing his political slogan "Chowkidar Chor Hai" to the top court. An old adage says, "To err is human". And only arrogant or ignorant people refuse to say sorry and adamantly hold on to their mistakes or errors of judgment.

Rahul's bravado was a big hollow, became obvious in no time. Since, he's desperate to dislodge Modi from power because of the corruption cases pending against him and his family, he is looking for partners at home and abroad to defeat BJP in Lok Sabha polls slated for 2024. Rahul's tasteless remarks (without any basis), drew flak from Uddhav Thackeray who said his party will not tolerate the insult of Savarkar.

"Veer Savarkar is our God, and any disrespect towards him will not be tolerated. We are prepared to fight, but insulting our Gods is not something we will tolerate," Uddhav said. Subsequently, Nationalist Congress Party chief Sharad Pawar is believed to have had a word with Rahul regarding this. In the meeting of the opposition leaders convened by Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge, Pawar apparently told Rahul that the real fight is with the BJP - while his Savarkar comment is deflecting from the main issue and upsetting the allies in Maharashtra.

The said meeting was not attended by former Maharashtra Chief Minister Thackeray. Fearing a break-up with Thackeray's Shiv Sena, Rahul has decided to keep his mouth shut on Savarkar issue. What happened to Rahul's boast of his uncompromising stand on public issues?

Rahul Gandhi's arrogance and sense of entitlement was on full display on March 25 last when he got apparently worked up over a journalist's question over BJP's 'OBC insult' allegations against him. "Why are you working so directly for BJP, do it with some discretion, ask it in roundabout... see there is a smile... if you want to work for the BJP, then bring a BJP flag, symbol and put it on your chest, then I'll answer you the same way I answer them. Don't pretend to be a pressman," he said. "Hawa nikal gayi," he said a moment later, before moving on to other questions.

Rahul's tirade against Savarkar underlines his ignorance about the freedom movement, his own ideological deficit and influence of the Left narrative on his personality. During his controversial 'Bharat Jodo Yatra', Rahul charged Veer Savarkar with being an "agent of the English". To buttress his allegation, he produced a copy of a letter Savarkar had written to the British, which ended with "Sir, beg to remain your most obedient servant." Rahul said he was of the view that Savarkar signed the letter out of fear and in doing so, he betrayed Mahatma Gandhi, Sardar Patel, Jawahar Lal Nehru and other leaders.

Does Rahul's conclusions about Savarkar on the basis of a letter make any sense? Even Mahatma Gandhi while corresponding with colonial masters used such expressions as was the norm then. In a communication dated June 22, 1920, addressed to Baron Chelmsford, then viceroy and Governor-General of India, Gandhiji introduced himself to be a "devoted well-wisher of the British empire."

Again, while explaining his stand on the issue of Khilafat, Gandhiji reiterates "my duty to the empire to which I owe my loyalty requires me to resist the severe violence that has been done to me Mussalman sentiment." While threatening to "sever all connection with British rule", Gandhiji, however, assures the Viceroy that he "still retained faith in the inherent superiority of British Constitution." Gandhiji signed off the letter in these words: "I have the honour to remain, your excellency's faithful servant."

What is the difference between how Gandhiji and Veer Savarkar ended their respective letters? While the former said he was a 'faithful servant' of the Viceroy, the latter signed as an "obedient" one.

In spite of sharp differences on a policy issue, most people, cutting across political and ideological spectrum, hailed Savarkar as a great patriot.

The first public speech Savarkar made after his release was at a function in Ratnagiri to welcome then Bombay Pradesh Congress Committee chief K.F. Nariman. With the Congress' tricolor unfurled in style, Savarkar led the salutation ceremony. Thirty groups in Bombay, including the city Congress unit, organized an enthusiastic reception, carrying him in a procession along a 4-km stretch from Azad Maidan to Girgaum.

Jawaharlal Nehru, C. Rajagopalachari and Subhas Bose sent congratulatory messages, Bose saying in a statement from Dalhousie that "there is no Indian who would not be delighted" at Savarkar's release and poignantly welcoming him "to what freedom we now enjoy in this unhappy land of ours." At the Bombay function, M.N. Roy, a young and Left-leaning Congress leader who would go on to become a communist icon, said he was one of Savarkar's oldest admirers.

In 1966, Indira Gandhi after the death of Veer Savarkar had said, "It removes from our midst a great figure of contemporary India. His name was a byword for daring and patriotism. Mr Savarkar was cast in the mould of a classical revolutionary and countless people drew inspiration from him."

In 1970, Mrs. Gandhi had also issued a commemorative stamp in Veer Savarkar's honour and had also given a private donation of Rs 11,000 to his memorial fund.

In a letter dated May 30, 1980, Mrs. Gandhi had written a letter to Pandit Bakhle, then secretary of Swatantrayaveer Savarkar Rashtriya Smarak, expressing her reverence for one of India's greatest freedom fighters Vinayaka Damodar Savarkar. The letter reads, "Veer Savarkar's daring defiance of the British Govt has its own importance in the annals of our freedom movement. I wish success to the plans to celebrate the birth centenary of this remarkable son of India."

Remember, freedom fighters were not clones of each other, and had at times strong differences - in nuances, approach and view on the road-map to freedom. Since they were humans, they did make mistakes as well. But one has to see the context and circumstances in which they operated. It's unfair to sit on judgement, on them, in the comfort of a free country and with the advantage of hindsight.

For the real Gandhi, means were as important as the end. But Rahul is a man in a tearing hurry. He has no time for such details of history or regard for truth. His world view is limited to the outcome of the next election. What keeps him going? His sense of entitlement. But in the changed political milieu, he can't always have his way, and that's something he finds difficult to accept.

(Mr. Balbir Punj is a Former Member of Parliament and a Columnist. He can be reached at: [email protected])

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are the personal opinions of the author. The facts and opinions appearing in the article do not reflect the views of OneIndia and OneIndia does not assume any responsibility or liability for the same.