Today is the 120th birth anniversary of Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, the iconic leader of the freedom movement whose disappearance in 1945 is still a topic of intense discussion in India's socio-political space, even after 70 years of Independence.
What would it be like had Netaji made a real appearance today? It is known that Netaji had strong differences with two of the towering leaders of his time – Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru.
He did not share the same conviction as the other two in the method of achieving independence from the British, even if they were all committed to their motherland's freedom. But what if Netaji had met Narendra Modi, the current prime minister of India, at his birthday party in 2017? Given that both Netaji and Modi strongly disapprove of everything that is Nehruvian in India, would they have agreed on most issues?
Here, we imagine a conversation between Netaji and Modi – the past and the present of Indian politics – and how it would have progressed.
Narendra Modi (NM): Happy birthday Subhas babu. It's such an honour talking to you. How have you been?
Subhas Bose (SB): Thanks Mr prime minister. It's the same for me too. I am fine but just that there are some health issues (obviously, 120 is not an age to be healthily alive but as we have said earlier, this is an imaginary piece and let's consider Netaji as a veteran who has retired from active politics and is watching things from the sidelines).
NM: I really wish you good health. You have been such a hero for our country. Had we had you as the first prime minister of this country instead of Nehru....
SB (interrupts): Sorry for interrupting Mr Modi. I really thank you for the kind words but I have a point to raise with you.
NM: Surely Netaji.
SB: I have noticed throughout that you are too obsessed with yourself, your own image. I acknowledge the way you have led from the front to take the BJP back to power, but I also feel that your government and party are only about you. Just now, you told me that you wish me good health. Why always this 'I', Mr Modi? Can you really rule India all by yourself? You have even replaced the Mahatma in that charkha photo. I find it objectionable.
NM (after a brief silence): That shouldn't have happened. Some over-enthusiastic loyalists are doing all this. But as far as the 'I' is concerned, you must have seen how Nehru and his successors of the Congress party ruled in the past. We still have a party with a difference.
SB: That difference is only visible to you, Mr Modi. If you have a close eye on how India is being run at the grassroots, you should have a concerned head on your shoulders. What I feel is that a lot of propaganda-based governance is going on, serious stuff is being announced more on Twitter and television. I remember you had bowed before Parliament House before entering it in 2014, but I haven't seen you addressing the Houses much after that. Was that all for show?
NM: Of course not, dear Netaji. I have always shown respect for our democracy, something that leaders from your own party did not do in the past. The Nehru-Gandhi dynasty made a mockery of the democracy that people like Gandhiji and you had dreamt of. Is it right if you single me out?
SB: Two wrongs don't make a right. I know the Gandhis made the party we had once fought for their family affair, reducing it into a sham. But at the same time, I do not feel Nehru was responsible for this dynastic rule. It is what his daughter Indira had done. This I am saying despite having my differences with the great Nehru. If I can tell you dear prime minister, our days had leaders with their differences of opinions, but still we worked together and that made the Congress party such a great organisation.
NM: You believe this saying despite your bitter experience at the Tripuri Congress in 1939?
SB: Yes, Mr Modi. After all, we had all fought for the country's Independence. I was not convinced about Bapu's methods and neither was he about mine. Jawaharlal was uneasy about this difference and Bapu had found a more loyal successor in him than me. But that hasn't reduced my respect for either of them. Maybe, a leader like you, born after Independence, will fail to understand it. Anyways, I regret the fact that Bapu didn't survive even a year after Independence and also that our country was partitioned, something that I feel damaged us permanently.
NM: But we still hold you high for the bravery you showed in trying to take on the British by joining hands with the Axis Powers.
SB: Yes, that was a strategic option which I had tried after the Congress route became difficult for me. But be very clear, dear Modi. Had I remained in the Congress and was there during and after independence, the party would have surely got split between me and Jawahar. Maybe, you, your party and the Hindutva predecessors you had might not have had the space to prosper.
NM: But we take a lot of inspiration from you, Netaji.
SB: Please don't, Mr Modi. I don't feel I am a deserving candidate. I have seen your party claiming me to be a mascot of Hindutva to which I object. It is true that I also gave my all as a nationalist in those days but there is a difference between the variant that your party professes from what I believe. We were firm believers in territorial nationalism while the BJP and its saffron concerns are convinced about a cultural nationalism, which I feel only encourages divide.
NM: Let's talk about something else, Mr Bose. What would have been your vision for India?
SB: I would have gone for a model akin to Turkey where Mustafa Kemal Ataturk had taken his time to push the country towards development. The rule by strong hands in the initial years would have done India good. Later, we could always go for a full-fledged democracy once things fell in place.
NM: This sounds contradictory, Netaji. A little earlier, you said you all fought together for Independence but now, you are hinting at the same authoritarianism that Indira Gandhi had displayed in the 1970s.
SB: India would not have done well otherwise. We have fallen back in many aspects that I feel could have been served only by a strong power. We always needed a strong Centre though I feel it is not the same today. A new India has emerged with stronger states where the Centre is more of a facilitator than the controller.
NM: You are right. Even we had thought the same earlier. Being a former chief minister of the flourishing state of Gujarat earlier, I know India's federal structure doesn't work the way it used to do once.
SB (smiling): And that's precisely why you are getting a taste of your own medicine now. You used to target the Manmohan Singh government at the Centre from Gandhinagar earlier and now, a woman named Mamata Banerjee from my state is doing the same against you. It's an endless process in Indian politics, I think.
The conversation went on for some more time though the two leaders did not find a common point to converge ultimately. Maybe that's the hallmark of the politics of this country today. The past never meets the present.
