Zero To Hero At JNU: What The Govt Can Learn From The Kanhaiya Kumar Fiasco

If the Kanhaiya Kumar episode has any lesson for the Modi government, it is this: before taking any action under the sedition law, or something equally draconian, ask yourself if you are going to make a hero out of a villain or not. This is exactly what happened with Kumar, who returned to the Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) campus yesterday (3 March) to a hero’s welcome after receiving bail.

That JNU is packed with Left-wing demagogues and even some anti-Hindu ideologues is obvious; but that is no reason for an allegedly nationalist government to wear its nationalism on its sleeve and act like a flat-footed T-Rex on campus. What the government has succeeded in doing is allowing Kanhaiya Kumar to claim to be the voice of reason. He claimed yesterday – not too implausibly - that his “azaadi” call was about achieving social emancipation, and not secession.

If the Modi government is to avoid more such bloomers, it has to learn from this failure. Here’s a ready reckoner on handling people like Kanhaiya Kumar and/or a Hardik Patel, or even an organisation like Greenpeace, who end up becoming martyrs despite shouting objectionable slogans, or adopting postures that hurt the country.

One, never act before you collect unimpeachable evidence against a person or organisation. In the JNU case, even though it is not disputed that at least one event saw anti-national slogans being raised, it has been difficult to pin this on Kanhaiya Kumar.

The fact that the police rushed to arrest him without checking the authenticity of the videos in circulation is like an unforced error in tennis. The mere availability of one or two doctored videos put all of the video evidence in the “suspect” category.

Two, always choose propaganda over action and arrest, especially in stage one. There is a right time to step in, and a wrong time. The government and the Delhi police moved in too early in the JNU case, when the country was not clear what all the outrage in nationalist circles was about.

In order to build public support, the damaging sloganeering must first be widely disseminated to the public before gauging whether it is a fit case for action or merely worthy of a general reprimand. By acting too early, the government allowed the rogues to reappear like nationalists, wrapped in the national flag.

Three, the party in power should never use its own students’ union or trade union arm as a favoured fifth column, especially when a confrontation is building up. Nothing demolishes the credibility of an organisation more than a perceived closeness to the ruling dispensation.

The Rohith Vemula suicide in the University of Hyderabad blew up in the Modi government’s face precisely because the university was seen to be acting in support of the ABVP, the student arm of the Sangh, and two central ministers were seen to be pressuring the authorities for “action” on the attack on an ABVP office-bearer. Also, when something untoward happens, like the Vemula suicide, the first words must be of regret, not defence of the government’s action.

Four, active provocation should be met with humour and put-downs, not angry words and hasty action. It is a given that the Left and other sections of the anti-BJP brigade will use fault-lines in Hindu society to provoke the party - by holding beef festivals (but never pork ones), or by extolling the virtues of Mahishasura and representing Durga in degrading ways.

The only way to dissuade provocation is to ignore it, when possible, and/or making fun of the people behind it, or dismissing them as juveniles unworthy of a response. The BJP’s Sanghi supporters seem to wear their anger on their sleeves and are seen to fly off the handle at the slightest provocation. The best way to deal with this is to educate the troops and offer similar tit-for-tat counter-provocations, so that both are dealt with in an even-handed manner.

Five, know your enemy. The coalition that is against this government includes many groups, working together or separately, but in mutually supportive ways. The coalition includes the SLOBs (Secular-Left Outrage Brigade), institutions created by SLOBs (JNU is a prime example), regional parties dependent on the minority vote, the international Left-Liberal media based in Delhi (including their Indian counter-parts in the Lutyens zone), evangelical and left-wing groups in the US, etc.

This is why the so-called “church attacks”, which later turned out to be random acts of impromptu vandalism or petty larceny, got immediate exposure in the whole world. In India, Left and Right may be enemies, but in the US, Left and Right are allies against the Modi government.

So it is important to understand how an issue will be blown out of proportion, and counter-strategies devised. The standard outburst against provocations – which Sangh organisations seem to specialise in, damaging their own cause – is guaranteed to lose the government brownie points.

Six, practise hypocrisy in public speech. It is important to say the appropriate words when something untoward happens even if the government had nothing to do with it and is being unfairly blamed.

Seven, for the long-term, the Modi government ought to create alternate institutions that are more sympathetic to its cause. Expecting the JNUs and FTIIs to listen to reason is pointless. They belong to a rival eco-system created by SLOBs and for SLOBS - and will remain that way in the foreseeable future. The best way forward is to ask them to find their own funding for growth and invest the saved tax rupees in creating new institutions with a different DNA.

If JNU claims to be an institution of excellence, people will be more than willing to fund it. Nothing will end JNU’s anti-national posturing better than to ask these worthies to ingratiate themselves with potential donors, to whom they have to explain what they were doing at an Afzal Guru fan club.