The second important date in the Ayodhya saga is November 9, 1989. By that time, the VHP-led movement had acquired a great deal of momentum. But instead of confronting or countering the campaign, the Rajiv Gandhi government once again sought to compromise with the Hindutva forces. Reeling under the Bofors crisis, a beleaguered Rajiv Gandhi allowed the assorted sants and sadhus mobilized by the VHP to perform “shilanyas” (foundation laying ceremony) for the Ram temple on disputed land that was dubiously declared to be undisputed. With the general elections just a few days away, the Rajiv government dispatched Union Home Minister Buta Singh to Ayodhya and the “shilanyas” took place under his “supervision.”

Rajiv Gandhi’s tragic assassination in May 1990 and Sonia Gandhi’s refusal to formally join politics temporarily removed the Gandhis from the helm of the Congress. It is a matter of speculation, therefore, whether the Babri Masjid would have survived if either had been leader at the time. As for Rajiv Gandhi’s reported remark to Sonia that he would protect Babri Masjid with his life, it can only be regarded as a private conversation that is unlikely to cut much ice today since he gave no such public assurance throughout the late Eighties when the dispute was at its height.

By raking up the Babri Masjid issue at this stage, Rahul Gandhi may actually end up doing a disservice to the party. The rift between the Muslim community and the Congress has healed in recent years — although the Congress may not be able to take advantage of this in view of its organizational weakness in UP — and Sonia Gandhi’s secular credentials remain particularly sound among the minorities.

... contd.