Mr. HN Bahuguna has finally joined the Congress (I). This is a gain for Mrs. Gandhi in her bid to recapture power. For Mr. Bahuguna is a dynamic leader with considerable organizational skill and commands a sizeable personal following in the country’s most populous state of UP where he has served as chief minister. He has also been able to persuade Syed Abdullah Bukhari, the Imam of Jama Masjid, Delhi, to lend support to the Congress (I). On the face of it, this increases the importance of Mr. Bahuguna’s return to Mrs. Gandhi because the Syed has emerged as a leading figure among the Muslims whose support is clearly vital for her. But Mr. Bukhari has played hard to get. He has not been content with the assurances given to him either by the Congress (I) general secretary, Mr. AR Antulay, or his “friend”, Mr. Bahuguna. He has insisted on and secured from Mrs. Gandhi herself a communication which may turn out to be somewhat embarrassing for her. Indeed, it is difficult to believe that she herself is not happy about it. The letter is dated November 20, that is just one day before Mr. Bukhari endorsed Mr. Bahuguna’s decision to join the Congress (I), and contains a reference to “some incidents, including the 1975 Jama Masjid incident” for which she has expressed regret. Both these are clear indications that Mrs. Gandhi has been compelled to write it at the last minute perhaps against her better judgment.
Whatever the explanation in terms of history for the fate of the Muslims in India, it cannot be seriously disputed that they have legitimate reasons to nurse a sense of grievance. The increase in the incidence of communal violence in the last two years or so only underscores this larger issue. As such it is beyond question that all those concerned with the future of the country – it cannot be secure if the largest minority is aggrieved and alienated – must do all in their power to ensure that the Muslims are fairly and justly treated. But how are we to go about this task? Basically the issue is whether or not an attempt should be made to force the pace of progress. Mr. Bukhari and others of his persuasion have acted in the belief that it is both necessary and possible for the Muslims to compel an important political party and leader to make specific commitments and they have succeeded with Mrs. Gandhi. The compulsions of the two sides are obvious enough. Only time will show whether they have been well advised or ill advised. But it seems to us that if Mr. Bukhari genuinely believes, as he has said he does, that the Congress (I) under Mrs. Gandhi’s leadership is “the only organisation which gives hope of strengthening the secular base and integrity of India” they should not have extracted from her commitments which may make things difficult for her. It was not necessary for them to anticipate a backlash in order to act with greater restraint and discretion. It would have been enough for them to recognise that this time the number of undecided voters is unusually large and their action can make the latter tilt away from the Congress (I).
The Times of India, 22 November 1979