Paromita Das
New Delhi: In the ongoing political landscape of Bharat, leaders of opposition parties, particularly Mamata Banerjee and Rahul Gandhi, have increasingly been accused of playing the “appeasement” card to consolidate their support base. This strategy, often rooted in promoting religious or community-based alliances, has become a cornerstone of their political narratives. While critics argue that such approaches are not only divisive but also harmful to national unity, these leaders continue to wield them as key components of their electoral strategies. Recent events, including Mamata Banerjee’s remarks on BJP’s “divisive politics” and Rahul Gandhi’s attacks on the central government, further underscore the pervasiveness of this approach.
The Politics of Appeasement in West Bengal
Mamata Banerjee, the Chief Minister of West Bengal, has long been associated with appeasement politics. Her tenure in the state has seen numerous occasions where she has seemingly catered to the minority vote bank, a tactic that has been both criticized and defended. In the aftermath of recent violent incidents, like the Mothabari violence, Mamata’s response has been emblematic of her approach: reiterating her commitment to ensuring peace, especially during religious festivals, while simultaneously calling out her political adversaries.
Following the violence in Malda’s Mothabari area, Mamata Banerjee visited the Eidgah in Kolkata during Eid-ul-Fitr, emphasizing her government’s resolve to prevent riots. In her speech, she condemned the opposition parties, indirectly targeting both the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Communist Party of India (Marxist). According to her, it was not the common people who caused the unrest but the political parties themselves, which is a subtle accusation of the BJP and CPI(M) manipulating the situation for their benefit.
Mamata’s rhetoric, which at times seems tailored to appease religious minorities, took on a particularly sharp tone when she remarked, “The duty of the majority is to protect the minority, and the duty of the minority is to stay with the majority.” Her emphasis on secularism and religious harmony, while commendable in theory, is seen by critics as a tool for securing the Muslim vote base in the state, with the implicit suggestion that the BJP, in contrast, is promoting “divisive politics.”
In light of these events, BJP leader Roopa Ganguly responded sharply, accusing Mamata Banerjee of being driven by fear. She stated that the Trinamool Congress (TMC) leader should focus on managing her state and not on the BJP’s national politics. According to Ganguly, Mamata’s focus on the BJP reflects her anxiety, particularly over the rising influence of the party in the region. Ganguly also brought up the participation of many Muslims in the Ram Navami processions in Jadavpur, implying that Mamata’s fears were unfounded, and her approach to religious issues was marked by hypocrisy.
Rahul Gandhi’s Strategy of Religious and Social Appeal
On the national stage, Rahul Gandhi has also been at the forefront of what many consider to be appeasement politics. Gandhi, the leader of the Indian National Congress, has often framed his party’s narrative around a strong defense of religious minorities, especially Muslims, and criticized the BJP for its alleged “communal” approach. His attacks on the government have been frequent and pointed, accusing the ruling party of undermining secularism and promoting divisive politics.
One notable example of Rahul Gandhi’s rhetoric is his consistent criticism of the BJP’s handling of religious tensions. Like Mamata Banerjee, Rahul Gandhi often invokes the idea of secularism and the protection of minority rights, while also accusing the BJP of using religious issues for political gain. His approach has been particularly effective in states where the Congress has deep roots, including Kerala and Rajasthan, where the party has traditionally relied on minority votes for support.
However, his critics argue that Rahul Gandhi’s brand of appeasement politics often leads to a lack of concrete policy action. Rather than offering substantive solutions to the challenges faced by the country’s minorities, his rhetoric is seen as more reactive than proactive. This has led to concerns that his approach, much like Mamata’s in West Bengal, is more about consolidating votes than addressing the root causes of division in Bharatiya society.
The Criticism of Appeasement Politics
The widespread use of appeasement politics by leaders like Mamata Banerjee and Rahul Gandhi has sparked intense debate in Bharatiya political circles. Critics argue that this approach deepens divisions between communities and undermines the spirit of national unity. By focusing too heavily on securing the support of specific groups, these leaders risk alienating large sections of the population, leading to a fragmented and polarized society.
In Mamata’s case, the constant invocation of secularism and the protection of minorities seems to be less about fostering genuine communal harmony and more about winning votes from religious minorities. Her government’s handling of the Mothabari violence, as well as her remarks against the BJP and CPI(M), indicates that she may be more focused on political point-scoring than addressing the root causes of religious unrest in West Bengal.
Similarly, Rahul Gandhi’s attempts to frame the Congress as the protector of secularism have often been met with skepticism. While the party’s historical commitment to secularism cannot be denied, his political approach seems more reactive to the BJP’s narrative than proactive in its own right. Critics contend that by emphasizing religious divides, he too may be contributing to the polarization he accuses the BJP of promoting.
Is Appeasement Politics the Right Path?
In today’s complex and diverse Bharatiya society, appeasement politics may seem like an easy way to win over key voter bases. However, such politics often rely on short-term gains, at the expense of long-term unity. Rather than using religion or community affiliation as a bargaining chip, political leaders should strive to address the genuine needs and concerns of all citizens, regardless of their religious or social background.
While Mamata Banerjee and Rahul Gandhi may argue that their approach is rooted in protecting minorities, their strategies risk further exacerbating societal divides. In a country as diverse as Bharat, leaders should focus on fostering unity, mutual respect, and equal opportunities for all citizens, rather than focusing on appeasing particular groups for political benefit.
Moving Beyond Divisive Politics
The politics of appeasement, as practiced by leaders like Mamata Banerjee and Rahul Gandhi, may provide short-term electoral victories, but it undermines the social fabric of the nation in the long run. Rather than dividing the population along religious lines, leaders must embrace inclusive governance, where policies are designed to benefit all sections of society. The future of Bharatiya democracy lies in moving beyond divisive politics and fostering a united, secular, and harmonious nation, where every citizen’s rights are protected, irrespective of their religion or community.
The post Mamata Banerjee’s Eid Visit: A Move to Strengthen Appeasement Politics After Mothabari Violence appeared first on Global Governance News- Asia's First Bilingual News portal for Global News and Updates.
