In contrast to the outsiders, Sinha, Shourie and Singh have not cast any aspersion on the RSS or Hindutva. Even Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi and Shahnawaz Husain have only targeted Varun Gandhi’s style of Hindutva, not Hindutva per se. They know that to do so would stigmatise them forever in the party. Sinha’s letter to the party president resigning from his position as party vice-president is reasoned and rational. He calls for introspection into the causes for the party’s defeat and suggests a Kamaraj-style plan whereby everyone resigns from their official posts till responsibility is fixed. But why did Sinha wait for over a month to air his views? Perhaps his real grievance is that, “We completely disregarded the parliamentary party constitution in the election of office-bearers of the parliamentary party on May 31.”

He was referring to Advani’s unilateral appointment of Sushma Swaraj as his deputy in the Lok Sabha and Arun Jaitley as the leader of the opposition in the Rajya Sabha. Advani, as the leader of the opposition in the Lok Sabha, was apparently authorised by the parliamentary board to take the decision. Though the constitution recommends otherwise, appointments made in this fashion have been the norm rather than the exception in the party.

For Singh, Sinha, Shourie and others like Murli Manohar Joshi, the Jaitley and Swaraj appointments indicate that the BJP is moving towards a generational change in leadership in which those who are above 65 would be left out. The RSS favours passing on the baton to those in their fifties, such as Sushma Swaraj, Arun Jaitley, Rajnath Singh, Narendra Modi, Venkaiah Naidu, Shivraj Singh Chouhan, Sushil Modi, Vasundara Raje and Ananth Kumar who were inducted into the party as part of the JP and anti-emergency movement.

... contd.