In the recent world tour of PM Modi, PM appears to be in two different personalities that are VideshiModi and DesiModi and the two seem to be two different faces of a coin.
During a joint media interaction with his British counterpart, a BBC reporter questions Modi over recent incidents of intolerance and asked why his country is becoming an intolerant place, after some genuflection Modi replied “India does not accept intolerance even if it is one or two or three incidents”.
Of course Modi condemn the Intolerance saying “For us every incident is serious. We do not tolerate it. The law acts strongly and will continue to do so.”
It shows PM’s split personality. Why Modi did not talk in India about Intolerance, Why Modi did not condemn the act of Hindu extremist?
It is important to remind the Prime Minister that he has neither condemned, nor acted upon number of incidents of Intolerance which involve his party colleagues, his ministers, the leaders of BJP and the RSS.
Contrast Mr Modi in India washed his hands off the Dadri Incident saying centre can’t get involved in State matters, nor he condemns the murder of Kalburgi nor Dalit Kids.
Does Narendra Modi need to go to Westminster in order to do his job in Delhi? Or more cynically, is he free to go back to being the Prime Minister of all of India now that he is not longer the BJP’s campaigner-in-chief in Bihar and the dog whistles to the party faithful can be put away for another election?
Mr Modi, did not tell the BBC reporter that this was a state problem and center can’t intervene in. He did not call it an “accident” as his minister Mahesh Sharma did. Nor he remark like VK sing if Dogs puppy dies then what center has to do.
Nor like his fellow MP Sakshi Maharaj who said after a Jammu and Kashmi MLA got beaten up for organizing a “beef party”, ‘Yug badal raha hai. Ish desh ke neta ko badalna padega. Nehin to chaurahain pe pitna padega’.
In London, Modi had no problem in condemning the growing intolerance and speak up as a national leader on issues of national importance and Law and order. Then why don’t Mr PM can speak in India?
Its India’s issue not the western issue, it need to be condemn and need action in India only.
The BBC reporter could have asked why he don’t control extremist?. Why every next day a minority or a dalit will be a victim of his party colleagues and Hindu extremist?
Mr. Modi’s complicit silence in these horrifying acts bodes ill for the future of India.” The hysteria about a ‘Hindu Taliban’ in Delhi is unwarranted and over the top and does injustice to the real victims.
Whether intolerance is actually on the rise in India is open to debate and should be debated with facts. What is not debatable has been Modi’s silence.
But Modi abroad has always been a different Modi, assertive but not aggressive. He has every right to be prickly in the West. He faces more protesters there than at rallies in India.
Mr Modi could remember Ambedkar in UK but he forgets the dalits in India who always become a victim of upper caste, he never acted against those who made dalit go naked or those who burn the kids, if counted this list will go long.
Now the question is whether this avatar of Modi will last once his plane lands in Delhi or whether this Modi is only meant for foreign media consumption?