What Does a BJP-RSS Separation Signify — If it Exists?

Over the past few days, there have been several opinion articles speculating on whether there is a growing rift between the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), and if so, what its impact may be. Speculation began when reporters on the ground noted a lacklustre campaign in which RSS cadres were virtually absent and has grown with BJP president JP Nadda’s recent remarks that the BJP no longer needs the RSS since it is now strong in its own right; the RSS is a cultural organisation that manages its affairs in its way, and the BJP is a political organisation that manages its affairs in its way. 

Whether Mr Nadda’s remarks point to a rift is open to debate. A growing difference between the RSS and the BJP’s organisational practice has been noted since the beginning of the Ram Janmabhoomi campaign in the 1980s and increasing mobilisation by radical offshoots of political Hindutva such as the Bajrang Dal and Shri Ram Sene – not to mention the rapid proliferation of social media in the BJP’s toolkit to influence public opinion.

It is also true that the RSS, once critical in deciding the BJP’s general secretaries and electoral candidates, has far less influence over both, and especially the latter, now. Mr Nadda might be putting a brave face on the absence of RSS campaigning on the ground, but either way, it is evident that the BJP is not as dependent on the RSS as it was earlier. Very possibly, this diminishing dependence might make the RSS nervous. 

If Mr Modi is the Hindu Hriday Samrat, Then What is the RSS?

But the fact is that the RSS has grown enormously in both numbers and recognition during the Modi years. On certain big-picture ‘cultural’ goals such as Article 370, the Ram temple, and other sought-after religious sites in Uttar Pradesh, Mr Modi has fulfilled the RSS' demands. Some argue further that Mr Modi has gone a long way towards forging Hindus into one nation irrespective of caste, as the RSS mentor Savarkar advocated.

The question then is whether these benefits are sufficient to compensate for Mr Modi’s marginalisation of the RSS in the BJP’s affairs and, perhaps more significantly, his takeover of Hindu representation from the RSS.

If Mr Modi is the Hindu Hriday Samrat, then what is the RSS? Does it remain the ‘ideological front’, as Mr Nadda put it, with the BJP as the ‘political front’, when Mr Modi has begun to claim that he is a vehicle of the lord? 

Back in 1979, Jayaprakash Narayan lamented that RSS president Nanaji Deshmukh had promised him that BJP leaders would quit the RSS on joining the Janata Party and being elected, but the BJP MPs had not done so nor had the RSS insisted they do. When Jan Sangh leaders such as Vajpayee and Advani were part of a party decision to topple the Morarji Desai administration, going on to form the BJP, the RSS concurred. 

Today, few would argue that BJP leaders should quit the RSS, or the RSS expel them. Jayaprakash’s lament was based on the assumption that political parties were bound by adherence to the secular principle of equality of all citizens under the Constitution; the RSS goal of Hindu unity, therefore, would have to be limited to a non-political domain. With the BJP as an avowedly Hindu party under Mr Modi, it matters little whether BJP leaders quit the RSS on entering the political field.  

The contrary does not hold true. It would matter a great deal if the RSS were to quit the BJP, but that seems unlikely given the benefits it has accrued in Mr Modi’s two terms, even if the severe weakening of its position as ideological mentor rankles. 

Political Hindutva Has Never Been as Dominant in India as It is Today

There is also the question of whether Mr Modi’s imprimatur on the BJP is here to stay. Undoubtedly, the BJP under Mr Modi is sharply distinct from the BJP during Mr Vajpayee’s tenure. But will it remain in the Modi mould after the prime minister steps down as the sole leader or is defeated at the hustings?

More likely there will be a battle for power in which the party will have to confront the fact that it is a conglomerate of widely differing political or religio-political beliefs. What will then transpire I cannot even guess, but it is surely safe to say that the RSS will regain some of the influence it lost during Mr Modi’s years. 

How much does all of this matter in India’s political landscape? Potentially, quite a bit. Political Hindutva has never been as dominant in India as it is today, spawning a culture of violence, abuse and open discrimination in which the rule of law is a casualty. If no sole leader emerges to replace Mr Modi, the less immoderate members of the BJP might be more assertive, and the RSS might then have to choose between the two. It has successfully managed to support extremists while retaining moderates in the past, but that was when it was smaller and extremist activities were limited. With political Hindutva increasingly in the public glare, deniability might not be so plausible. 

But this is speculating on a future unknown. The RSS has been silent on the opinion-writers’ rumours and they will soon die down. In the meantime, reports of citizens being deleted from voter lists, and Muslim voters even being forcibly prevented from casting their votes in areas of Uttar Pradesh, abound. The BJP has not commented on these reports – which have been barely reported in the mainstream media – and the Election Commission has not yet declared re-election in those areas. An RSS disassociation from the BJP would certainly be welcome, but I am not holding my breath. 

[Radha Kumar is an academic and author. Her latest book is The Republic Relearnt: Renewing Indian Democracy, 1947-2024 (Penguin Vintage). This is an opinion piece and the views expressed are the author's own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for them.]