ON Sardar Patel’s 151st birth anniversary on October 31, it is worthwhile to look at the relations between him and the RSS/BJP. Why does the RSS/BJP appear to favour Patel so much? And what were his views about the RSS?

The efforts by RSS/BJP to appropriate Patel have intensified since Modi came to power. Propaganda is being carried out that if Patel had become Prime Minister, the fate of the country would have been different. It is claimed that injustice was done to Patel and that Nehru was jealous of him, and so on.

But what is the purpose of this disinformation? First, it is to conceal the fact that the RSS had no role in the freedom movement. The people whom it regards as its ideals are associated with submitting apologies, informing on freedom fighters, and receiving pensions as beneficiaries of British favour. Therefore, it needs a borrowed hero to validate its false nationalism as genuine. It believes that Patel can easily be claimed as its own and that, by hiding behind his personality, it can also conceal its own misdeeds. Second, by pitting Patel against Nehru, they want to blunt Nehru’s opposition to communalism. In this way, they hope to dismantle the secular framework and establish a Hindu Rashtra based on the hierarchical social order advocated by Manusmriti. Third, it is to obscure the glorious anti-imperialist spirit of the freedom movement. If the discussion is confined to Nehru and Patel instead of focusing on the freedom struggle, the RSS can escape the embarrassment it repeatedly faces over its role in that struggle.

Now, let us look at documented history which reveals the reality.

ASSASSINATION OF MAHATMA GANDHI AND RSS

Following Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination, a meeting of the Union Cabinet on February 2, 1948, held the RSS responsible for the act, and the organisation was subsequently banned. The resolution stated, “Undesirable and even dangerous activities have been carried out by members of the Sangh. It has been found that, in several parts of the country, individual members of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh have participated in violent acts such as arson, looting, robbery and murder, and have collected illegal arms and ammunition. They have been found distributing leaflets that incite people to adopt terrorist methods, collect weapons, create disaffection against the government, and mislead the police and the armed forces. These activities have been carried out secretly, and the government has periodically considered the extent to which it has become necessary to deal with the Sangh as an organisation because of these activities.”

The resolution said that the government had tried to firmly deal with individuals rather than the whole organisation itself, but this hadn’t worked. Hence. It goes on to say, “However, the objectionable and harmful activities of the Sangh continued unabated, and the ideology of violence fostered and inspired by its activities had claimed many lives. The latest and most precious victim was Mahatma Gandhi.”

“In these circumstances, it is the paramount duty of the government to take effective measures to prevent this terrible form of violence from raising its head again. As a first step in this direction, it has been decided to declare the Sangh an unlawful organisation. The government has no doubt that, in taking this step, it enjoys the support of all law-abiding citizens and of all those whose hearts are filled with concern for the welfare of the country.”

It is noteworthy that Patel was Home Minister when the RSS was declared an unlawful organisation by the Home Ministry. This decision was taken unanimously by the Cabinet. Shyama Prasad Mukherjee was also a member of the Cabinet at the time. He, too, agreed with the decision.

On February 1, Golwalkar and RSS members were arrested. Golwalkar was released from jail on August 6, on the conditions that he could not leave Nagpur, attend any public meeting, or publish any statement or article in a newspaper without the administration’s prior approval.

A FLOOD OF APOLOGIES

Immediately after his release, Golwalkar began writing to the Prime Minister and Home Minister, pleading that he and the RSS were innocent. He wrote his first letters to the Prime Minister and Home Minister on August 11, 1948, seeking permission to travel to Delhi and meet them. However, neither of the leaders replied. In a subsequent letter to the Prime Minister dated September 24, 1948, Golwalkar began invoking the spectre of communism to urge the government to lift the ban on the RSS.

He wrote, “During this period, with the RSS having been banned, intelligent young people are rapidly falling into the communist trap. In view of the disturbing developments taking place in Burma, Indo-China, Java and other neighbouring countries, we can imagine the nature of this danger. If the RSS, which had been an effective check, no longer exists, the consequences are evident. The Communists have always regarded the RSS as their principal obstacle and have tried to discredit and malign it. In the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi and the subsequent ban on the RSS, they found an opportunity of a lifetime, which they exploited to condemn the RSS and advance their own work. Reports of their progress are alarming.”

Golwalkar lamented this spread of “foreign -isms” and pitched the RSS as an effective counter to communism, writing, “I hope you will give this problem calm consideration and help create an atmosphere in which the RSS can function honourably and assist the government in combating this danger in its own distinctive cultural way.”

However, this had no effect on Patel or Nehru. A.V. Pai, writing from the Prime Minister’s Office, informed Golwalkar that his letter had been forwarded to the Home Ministry, which would decide the matter RSS. The letter made it clear that the government did not accept the RSS chief’s claim of innocence. The central and state governments possessed sufficient evidence of the involvement of the RSS and its associates in disruptive, communal and looting-related incidents.

PATEL SHOWS A MIRROR TO RSS

On September 11, Patel sent a comprehensive reply to Golwalkar’s letters, with a copy to Nehru. Exposing the anti-national character and activities of the RSS, Patel wrote: “You are well aware of my views regarding the RSS…. But it appears that those views have had no effect on the members of the RSS, nor has there been any change in their activities.…The objectionable aspect emerged when, consumed by a spirit of revenge, they began attacking Muslims. Organising Hindus and helping them is one thing but taking revenge for their suffering by attacking innocent and helpless men, women and children is quite another.”

Patel continued: “All their speeches were full of communal poison. It was not necessary to spread poison in order to inspire enthusiasm among Hindus and organise them for their protection. Ultimately, the consequence of this poison was the sacrifice of Gandhi’s invaluable life. After Gandhi’s assassination, not even the slightest sympathy for the RSS remained in the minds of the government or the public. In fact, opposition to it grew stronger. This opposition intensified further when RSS members celebrated Gandhi’s assassination and distributed sweets. Under these circumstances, it became unavoidable for the government to take action against the RSS.”

TO DELHI AND BACK - EMPTY-HANDED

After repeated requests, Golwalkar was granted permission to travel to Delhi. He met Patel, but his arguments had no effect on him. Golwalkar also wanted to meet Nehru, but no appointment was given. On November 12, 1948, H. V. R. Iyengar, Secretary at the Home Ministry, sent a letter to Golwalkar stating: “Sardar Patel regrets that he is unable to depart from the position he adopted during his previous meeting with you and the oral communication conveyed to you through Mr. Bedekar of the Home Ministry. The provincial governments have expressed their inability to lift the ban on your organisation. For the reasons communicated to you in the Prime Minister’s letter of November 10, the Government of India is unable to advise the provincial governments to adopt a different course.”

The letter goes on to tell Golwalkar “to make immediate arrangements to return to Nagpur” and inform accordingly “no later than tomorrow evening.”

Continued Deception

The government and Patel wanted the RSS to have a written constitution if it wished to function. After considerable resistance and evasions, the RSS was compelled to prepare a constitution and submit it to the Home Ministry. On May 3, the Home Ministry raised the following objections:

·        Secretive functioning and communal hatred: The organisation operated secretly, and its principal objective appeared to be spreading hatred among people and promoting communal polarisation. The constitution contained no clear commitment to abandoning these practices.

·        Commitment to lawful and peaceful methods: The constitution stated that the organisation would pursue its ideals through lawful and peaceful means, whereas the history of the RSS and its workers had been contrary to this claim. There was no clear commitment to abandoning such practices.

·        Loyalty to the Constitution and the national flag: It was necessary to make an explicit declaration of allegiance to the Constitution of India. Rather than merely accepting the saffron flag, the organisation was required to express clear allegiance to the national flag.

·        Transparency and accountability: To address allegations of secretive functioning, all the organisation’s rules and instructions had to be written down and published. Its annual income and expenditure also had to be audited and the accounts published.

·        An authoritarian organisational structure: Objections were raised to the RSS’s authoritarian structure, including the appointment of people from a single region and community. The dictatorial functioning of the Sarsanghchalak and the manner in which appointments were made were also considered a threat to democracy.

·        Recruitment of children: It would be mandatory to obtain permission from parents or guardians when recruiting children.

Instead of providing clear answers to these concerns, Golwalkar attempted to evade the issues with ambiguous replies. The Home Ministry continued to raise objections to his arguments. When Patel realised that the matter would not be resolved through ordinary persuasion, Iyengar, on his behalf, wrote a stern letter to Golwalkar, stating: “Your letter suggests that you are so thoroughly imbued with your own ideas of truth and justice and the righteousness of your conduct that you are unable to receive any unpleasant truth in a constructive spirit or appreciate any reasonable and proper perspective regarding the difficulties created by your own actions. Under these circumstances, the government does not believe that continuing this correspondence would serve any useful purpose. As far as the government is concerned, the position remains as stated in my earlier letters.”

Following the Home Ministry’s firm stance, Golwalkar and the RSS had little choice but to accept the government’s conditions. A written constitution was prepared, allegiance to the Indian Constitution was declared, and the national flag was accepted. The RSS also agreed to hoist the national flag at its headquarters on August 15 and January 26. However, as soon as the ban was lifted, the RSS returned to its old refrain.

Addressing a gathering in Nagpur after the ban was lifted, Golwalkar said, “T. V. R. Shastri is only one year younger than my father. He expressed a desire to have the unwritten constitution put into writing. I was not particularly enthusiastic, but I had to yield out of respect for someone so much older than me.”

On July 22, 1949, Golwalkar told The Hindu, “We have not abandoned anything in our fundamental principles. The Government of India wanted our constitution to be in writing, and we did that. The public may call it a clarification if they wish.”

RSS and the BJP cannot genuinely respect Patel because he opposed the very idea of a Hindu Rashtra. According to Patel: “In my view, India can neither become a Hindu country nor can Hinduism become the religion of the Government of India. We must remember that minorities also live in our country, and it is our duty to ensure their protection. This country belongs to everyone, regardless of their religion or caste. We cannot follow the path that Pakistan has chosen. We must ensure that our secular objectives remain secure. Every Muslim, every Christian and every member of other minority communities must feel secure here and must enjoy equal rights as an Indian citizen. If we fail to make them feel this way, it will be a grave insult to our heritage and to our country.”