Understanding Navjot Singh Sidhu’s Moral Stance, and Yours, too!

 -  -  181

Navjot Singh Sidhu has made Moral Stand the core of his politics. It is time to discuss Sidhu’s morality and the morality of those supporting or opposing him. Also, what about your morality? Senior journalist SP Singh, in this piece Exclusive to the WSN, dwells upon this question of morality in partisan politics. BY MOST ACCOUNTS, NAVJOT SINGH SIDHU HAS has taken a moral stance – he is opposing the appointment of Advocate General (AG), perhaps even that of the […]

Navjot Singh Sidhu has made Moral Stand the core of his politics. It is time to discuss Sidhu’s morality and the morality of those supporting or opposing him. Also, what about your morality? Senior journalist SP Singh, in this piece Exclusive to the WSN, dwells upon this question of morality in partisan politics.

BY MOST ACCOUNTS, NAVJOT SINGH SIDHU HAS has taken a moral stance – he is opposing the appointment of Advocate General (AG), perhaps even that of the Director-General of Police (DGP.) He is also opposing ministerial berths to the likes of Gurjit Rana, or perhaps even Brahm Mohindra/Singla et al.

It should have been easy to believe Navjot Singh Sidhu. Some of the reservations that he has expressed make complete sense.

It was expected that Capt Amarinder Singh will call him ‘unstable’, the Akalis will call him ‘unguided missile’ and the BJP will badmouth him day in and out. You can disregard those epithets as coming from Sidhu’s political opponents.

Sunil Jakhar has also taken a certain position –he has lambasted Sidhu for breaching the trust reposed in him by the Congress High Command. (So what is he actually saying? The High Command – which means the two little gandhis – puts Sidhu in charge and then ensures a seat for Rana Gurjit in the ministry and then wanted Sidhu to back their decisions. And Jakhar is alright with it?)

Sunil Jakhar has emerged as the topmost Congress leader to bat for scum like Rana Gurjit. Also, Sunil Jakhar, the man who opposed Atul Nanda as AG, is perfectly at peace with APS Deol as AG. This is how the likes of Sumedh Saini survive – they have deep tentacles in the system. Jakhar has almost emerged like a sleeper cell activated when other rats had abandoned ship.

Here is a simple translation: Sunil Jakhar has emerged as the topmost Congress leader to bat for scum like Rana Gurjit. Also, Sunil Jakhar, the man who opposed Atul Nanda as AG, is perfectly at peace with APS Deol as AG. This is how the likes of Sumedh Saini survive – they have deep tentacles in the system. Jakhar has almost emerged like a sleeper cell activated when other rats had abandoned ship.

But what about Navjot Singh Sidhu himself and his moral stance?

Forget your Facebook feed, or Twitter handle, or your news channels propelled by ‘reliable sources.’ Just focus on the politics of Navjot Singh Sidhu. Let us do justice to the man – after all, he is taking a seemingly moral position.

Navjot Singh Sidhu is prone to reminding us about his two decades in politics. For most of his political career, he has remained a member of India’s party of hate. Sidhu’s had no moral problem in coexisting with a stringent anti-Muslim propaganda. He never advocated better relations with Pakistan as key to peace in South Asia. Sidhu’s politics had no place to raise the Ambani-Adani capture of Indian business and commerce space. While in BJP, Sidhu did not raise the issue of ANTI-MUSLIM RIOTS in Gujarat in 2002. In fact, that was actually the moment that Sidhu entered politics, becoming a BJP MP in 2004. Best Bakery was still in the news, and ‘Maut Ka Saudagar’ slogan still had political currency.

When did Sidhu raise a voice for the victims of the Gujarat riots? When did he raise questions within his then beloved party about the role of senior politicians in riots?

We need to dwell a little more on this point – because this was the moment of truth in the career of many Indian politicians, and most were found wanting.

People may have a short memory, but as commentators, we must not forget that Sidhu was an MP when Indian politics exploded with Tehelka’s reportage (Remember Operation Kalank?). This 2007 investigation into the Gujarat riots shook the country as the footage played out on Aaj Tak. It clearly stated that violence was made possible by the support of Gujarat police, the Modi regime and the man for who Sidhu composed verses!

When did Sidhu raise a voice for the victims of the Gujarat riots? When did he raise questions within his then beloved party about the role of senior politicians in riots?

The fact is that Sidhu did not leave the BJP for any ideological reason whatsoever. He is such an honest man that he did not even claim there was any ideological reason involved. He openly said that he was sidelined when Arun Jaitley was given a ticket and that is why he was miffed.

“Either, I will contest from Amritsar, or else I won’t contest elections.” That was the most solid reasoning he offered in 2014 when he was still a member of the BJP.

Forget about having any ideological issue with the BJP, Navjot Singh Sidhu did not ever issue a single statement about Love Jihad or Ghar Wapasi bogeys floated by the BJP-RSS, did not utter a word about killings of Pehlu Khan or Mohd Akhlaq or many others in public lynchings, never commented on viral videos of such lynchings that competed for TRP with his laughter programs, never once said that people with saffron scarves around their necks who are going out beating young boys and girls in bars, restaurants or parks for sitting together are goons.

From 2004 to 2016 as a Member of Parliament on a BJP ticket, Navjot Singh Sidhu had no moral or ideological issue with the BJP-RSS-VHP-Bajrang Dal. He has never uttered a word against Yogi’s politics.

The moral politician remained hidden inside Navjot Singh Sidhu. In fact, let us not forget, Navjot Singh Sidhu actually accepted a Rajya Sabha nomination from the BJP after the Arun Jaitley episode and resigned only in July 2016 amid rumours that he was about to join AAP.

From 2004 to 2016 as a Member of Parliament on a BJP ticket, Navjot Singh Sidhu had no moral or ideological issue with the BJP-RSS-VHP-Bajrang Dal. He has never uttered a word against Yogi’s politics.

How is it possible to remain silent on every single issue but find your moral fibre when it comes to farmers” agitation or opposing Amarinder Singh or quitting on the question of Rana Gurjit joining the Cabinet?

We are not aware of what all Navjot Singh Sidhu took into account when he decided
to join the BJP. He was young, new to partisan politics, and was perhaps looking for
career options/serving the country — not necessarily mutually exclusive objectives.
But he had come into his own when he opted to join the Congress party. Just as he
is today clear that he wanted a clean slate and do good, did he have the same
considerations at that time?

When he swung down to Ravneet Singh Bittu’s house even before becoming the
state party president, was he not giving credence to the kind of politics Bittu openly
stands for? When he went to offer tributes and stood with folded hands before the
‘samadhi’ of slain CM Beant Singh, was he not announcing his choice of who the epithet of “Martyr” be bestowed upon?

When he swung down to Ravneet Singh Bittu’s house even before becoming the state party president, was he not giving credence to the kind of politics Bittu openly stands for? When he went to offer tributes and stood with folded hands before the ‘samadhi’ of slain CM Beant Singh, was he not announcing his choice of who the epithet of “Martyr” be bestowed upon?

And then there is that lover of the random Urdu verses and glorified munshi
Manpreet Singh Badal. I was in Gidderbaha when Manpreet Singh Badal was fighting his first election in 1995. What kind of language and politics do you think this Dosco/St Stephens educated figure of sophistication was spewing out against Beant Singh? Beant Singh for him was a killer of Sikh youth. Now Manpreet Singh Badal stood before Beant Singh’s Samadhi with hands folded and eyes closed in deep contemplation, I wonder what Urdu verse must be going through his mind. There are so many about munafqat – hypocrisy.

Like this sardar of morality who had flown a kite in Punjab during his few months
long-People’s Party of Punjab festival and attracted a lot of media headlines, Sidhu,
too, has never contended with that problematic past of Punjab.

Like this sardar of morality who had flown a kite in Punjab during his few months long-People’s Party of Punjab festival and attracted a lot of media headlines, Sidhu, too, has never contended with that problematic past of Punjab.

Any serious claim to morality is hinged on dealing with a complex web of issues, but
sometimes, you can simplify it for the particularly dumb: Do you stand for Beant
Singh style of bringing peace to Punjab? Do you have a stand on human rights? Is
Beant Singh a martyr? What is the contribution of Ravneet Singh Bittu? What is the
contribution of Gurkirat Singh Kotli to Punjab, to gender equality, to respect for
women?

The fact is that Navjot Singh Sidhu is as much a part of the same political system as
anyone else who can coexist with Islamophobia, hate speech, hate politics,
violation of human rights, ignoring or facilitating corporate greed, elite capture of
resources and opportunistic alliances, silences and, of course, bombastic speeches
about morality.

The dirty infighting within any party that spills out in public domain is borne out of a desire to capture more, to position oneself as more suitable to the guy next to him, and to somehow grab the seat of power.

The fact is that Navjot Singh Sidhu is as much a part of the same political system as anyone else which can coexist with Islamophobia, hate speech, hate politics, corporate greed, elite capture of resources and opportunistic alliances, silences and bombastic speeches about morality.

There are many ways to do it —

You can join a party of hate and survive for decades thereby not questioning the killings of Muslims.

You can join a grand old party and survive by not questioning what it did to Punjab and the aspirations of people, and how it played communal card, projected Sikhs across the country as terrorists and then won 426 seats in Lok Sabha.

(Sunil Jakhar should remember that his entire political legacy is based on this Lok Sabha that was formed by selling the “Sikhs are terrorists” line to the country — Balram Jakhar became a Speaker of this 8th Lok Sabha. He never uttered a word that the Congress party should not have issued huge advertisements in Indian media that showed a Sikh taxi driver and posed the question – “Will you send your child to school in his taxi?”)

People in Punjab, who are worried about what has been done to their Jallianwala Bagh, do not have the option of not seriously thinking about justice in other genocidal or communal killings.

— Gujarat Riots is no more an agenda of any political party, and Congress is a part of that pact.

— The November pogrom of Sikhs in Delhi is no more an agenda of any political party, and BJP, Congress, AAP, Akali Dal, Left parties are a part of that pact.

— Islamophobia is not an agenda of any political party, and Congress is part of that pact.

You are a moral person. Your morality will decide who is moral, and to what extent. That is the crux of all politics.

Between Sidhu’s struggles with finding and articulating his morality, Sunil Jakhar’s pain at losing his chance and new-found josh in attacking Sidhu and sucking up to the little gandhis, Amarinder’s sudden sensitivity towards national security and his love for Amit Shah, Sukhbir Badal’s inner happiness at the fall of Sidhu and implosion within Congress, and the BJP’s clever games in Punjab, Manish Tewari’s cheap-shot tweets, and the clownish hacks peddling ‘bharoseyog sootar‘ style non-sense as journalism, it is your own morality that is at stake.

You are a moral person. Your morality will decide who is moral, and to what extent. That is the crux of all politics.

You decide which are the compromises that you can live with, and which compromises are deal-breakers.

The Sidhus, Amarinders, Jakhars, Badals, Gandhis, Harish Rawats, Manish Tewaris and Bharoseyog Sootars do not decide your morality. You decide yours.

Are you winning on that moral turf? You do not need to tweet about it. You only need to move away from your Facebook feed, your Twitter handle, your television for five minutes and be with yourself.

There is no confusion.

There is a resistance movement out there in the chowk. We do not even have the 1980s-vintage excuse that there was no option. If you find that some of their stances are also problematic, go fight to get them right. That will be a moral fight and a moral choice.

The Sidhus, Amarinders, Jakhars, Badals, Gandhis, Harish Rawats, Manish Tewaris and Bharoseyog Sootars do not decide your morality. You decide yours.

Sidhu can and will fight his own battles. Channi can keep his chief ministership and Jakhar can nurse his wounds and hypocrisy. Manish Tewari can drool some more, and Amarinder Singh can have another peg and sing another song. Ambika Soni can indulge in some more palace intrigue and BJP can hope for some more cow dung on the doorsteps of some more of its leaders. And you can find your moral self. It’s right inside you.

181 recommended
print iconPrint
2643 views
bookmark icon

5 thoughts on “Understanding Navjot Singh Sidhu’s Moral Stance, and Yours, too!”

    Write a comment...

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    Oldest
    Newest
    Most Upvoted