*** ...the position of the BJP will continue to remain untenable if it does not change its image or comes out openly against the construction of the temple. The party can go more fundamentalist to placate Hindu chauvinists. But that kind of posture will not cut any ice with the minorities and the Dalits. The assembly elections have proved that point. ***

POLITICAL parties, like individuals, should learn from their mistakes. If they don't, they are thrown into the dustbin of history. It does not appear that the BJP is any wiser after its rout in all the four states _ UP, Uttaranchal, Punjab and Manipur, where the assembly elections were held recently. The statements by the party leaders are more

rationalisation than realisation of what went wrong.

The BJP wants to keep its eyes shut to the fact that the takers of its Hindutva line have declined in numbers considerably. The party's parochial stance has created a scare in the society, which wants to sustain its pluralistic character. The lesson that communal forces of all hues have to learn is that they cannot take people beyond a point. If they do so, it begins to recoil. The fate of the BJP is an example.

I concede that Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee, as he claims, has not ever played the Hindu card in elections. But then his writ does not run even in his own government, much less in the party. All can see how the cabinet and the BJP high command are divided between liberal Vajpayee's supporters and those of hard-line Home Minister LK Advani. It is Advani who has his ways and that way does not lead to secularism. Vajpayee may resent the word, mukut (mask), once used to describe him. But his weak policy has often provided a shield to the extremists to shoot their darts from behind. When the chips are down, it is Advani or, for that matter, the RSS, which counts. Vajpayee seems to go along.

Take construction of the temple at the place where the Babri masjid

stood before its demolition in December 1992. True, Vajpayee has said that there were only two alternatives: one, a settlement between Hindus and Muslims and, two, a judicial verdict. In the absence of either, the law will take its own course. Still, he dare not tell his party to drop the temple construction from its agenda because the hard-liners have the last word. What do people infer? Vajpayee is not opposed to the construction of the temple in principle. But he is not wanting to disturb the status quo lest he should lose even a few from his allies who give him a majority in the Lok Sabha.

No doubt, the Vajpayee government has given an unequivocal assurance through the President's address to parliament that it was duty bound to maintain the status quo at Ayodhya. Yet there is no action against the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), which has thrown down the gauntlet to the government on starting construction from mid-March. Carved pillars for the temple are not far from the site. There is genuine fear that the law and order machinery may not move quickly or adequately.

When a former governor of UP requests the Chief Justice of India to take suo motu action to maintain the status quo, it indicates that the

government's words have ceased to evoke confidence. The former governor goes to the extent of saying that "the only hope rests with your lordship."

Indeed, the Narasimha Rao-led Congress government made more similar pronouncements on protecting the mosque. At that time also, it was said that the Centre would never allow anyone to take the law into his own hands. The Supreme Court too had directed the state to maintain the status quo till the final judgment on the case pending before the state High Court was pronounced.

Still, the mosque was pulled down and the Centre did not lift even a finger to stop the destruction. Central police forces stood by as spectators. The state machinery saw to it that even the last brick of the mosque was pulled out. The BJP government has rewarded some of the officers of those days and a couple of them have even become party MPs. The situation in UP is that the BJP has been defeated and the alternative government has not come into being. "In this duration," as the former governor has warned, "there will be confusion and absence of any clear directions from the interim government." If 10 lakh people assemble at Ayodhya, as the VHP has warned,

the government might feel helpless. So did the Centre in December 1992. The time to act is now and stop people from assembling at Ayodhya. Vajpayee has assured at an all-party meeting that the government is taking necessary steps not to allow people gather near the site.

Amidst the dust raised by the VHP, one should not forget that the four states, where the BJP has been crushed, embrace nearly one-sixth of the country's population. True, the state elections are different from those of parliament. Yet, the verdict has damaged the credibility of the Vajpayee government. There is something called moral responsibility and the BJP cannot run away from it. If nothing else, the Vajpayee government should learn to be more responsive to the opposition. Its initial reaction in parliament did not suggest that. The party must pursue the consensual politics. The arrogance of some BJP ministers is too pronounced to go unnoticed. With 14 states in the Congress kitty, the BJP should try to keep it in the picture before embarking on any important policy, domestic or external.

The election of the President in July will be one such test. The BJP should know that its candidate can be defeated if it decides to challenge the opposition. What the BJP has to

guard against is the revolt that is brewing among the allies in the National Democratic Alliance (NDA), the coalition of 24 parties that Vajpayee heads. Some of the allies have been sulking for a long time because of the scant attention paid to them. Most of them have unimportant portfolios with the BJP state ministers attached to them to dilute their importance. They also nourish the feeling that when it comes to real issues, the BJP confines the discussion to its top party ministers. "The Sangh cabinet is above the cabinet," a non-BJP minister says. The allies may ask for greater participation in the affairs of the government.

But the point of concern for the BJP should be the permutations and combinations that have begun to be discussed to pull down the NDA government. There is nothing tangible yet because of the Congress dislike of the Mulayam Singh's Samajwadi Party, which has emerged as the single largest party in the UP assembly. He had refused to support the Congress president Sonia Gandhi when she could have formed the government at the Centre in 1999. The CPI (M) is trying its best to bring together the secular parties to challenge the Vajpayee government.

On the other hand, the BJP is making every effort to woo Mayawati, the Bahujan Samaj Party leader. Her party's 14 seats in the Lok Sabha are more important to the NDA than the 95 she has in the UP assembly. The BJP favours supporting her government from outside. Probably, the party realises that the electorate has defeated it. That its entry through the back door may boomerang and cost it dearly in the general election. Mayawati's predicament is that her party could split if she decides to join hands with the BJP. Muslim members might revolt against such a situation. Whatever Mayawati's decision, the position of the BJP will continue to remain untenable if it does not change its image or comes out openly against the construction of the temple. The party can go more fundamentalist to placate Hindu chauvinists. But that kind of posture will not cut any ice with the minorities and the Dalits. The assembly elections have proved that point.

Kuldip Nayar is an eminent Indian columnist.