Follow Countercurrents on Twitter 


Support Us

Submission Policy

Popularise CC

Join News Letter




Editor's Picks

Press Releases

Action Alert

Feed Burner

Read CC In Your
Own Language

Bradley Manning

India Burning

Mumbai Terror

Financial Crisis


AfPak War

Peak Oil



Alternative Energy

Climate Change

US Imperialism

US Elections


Latin America









Book Review

Gujarat Pogrom

Kandhamal Violence


India Elections



About Us


Fair Use Notice

Contact Us

Search Our Archive

Subscribe To Our
News Letter

Name: E-mail:


Our Site






Modi Goes To London

By Subhash Gatade

01 September, 2013


Good news is followed by spate of bad news.

Narendra Modi, the 'architect' of today's Gujarat, must be realising this dictum of late despite the fact that the corporate media - to quote an analyst - 'loves' him.

May it be the growing resistance of the peasantry inside the state to his vision of development compelling him to withdraw a major chunk of villages from the much discussed Mandal-Becharaji Special Investment Region (SIR) or the crude manner in which the government's anti Dalit stance is coming to the fore, the signals are definitely ominous.

And now comes the news that in the recent elections to the students' union at the Maharaja Sayajirao University (MSUSU ) of Baroda, ABVP (Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad) – part of what is popularly known as ‘Sangh Parivar’ has been completely wiped out, after a gap of 10 years and the gainer has been student wing of the main opposition party. Interestingly BJP had put up Modi's posters around the campus describing him a 'youth icon', began removing them after the results started coming in. Around a dozen hoardings with Modi's photo, asking people to join "Youth for Change" Face book page, had also come up in the city two weeks ahead of the MSUSU polls. It was absolutely clear that BJP's attempt to project Modi as the youth icon had backfired. Neither the posters found any takers nor the hoardings could influence the students.

And this was not the first time that the youth in Gujarat had exhibited its growing dislike for the brand of politics propagated by Modi. Only few months back in the Gujarat University student senate elections, ABVP had similarly lost its majority.

Undoubtedly, at a time when the BJP is tapping into new communication platforms in a big way as it prepares for the 2014 Lok Sabha elections, and also aims to use new media for "crowd sourcing (obtaining ideas from online community)" portraying Narendra Modi as a "youth icon" these results are just another proof to vindicate the great hiatus between what the Party/Parivar thinks about Modi and what is the actual situation on the ground.

Not some time ago BJYM (Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morcha) – another affiliate of the RSS ‘Parivar’ -President Anurag Thakur had told IANS that "since the time Narendra Modi was appointed head of the party's campaign committee for the Lok Sabha polls, youth want to associate with the BJP with great vigour." Perhaps now it is time that he modulates his words to stay relevant. And not only him but the likes of Rajdeep Sardesais' will also have to revisit their understanding about 'Why Modi strikes a chord with youth ..'as he expressed some time back in his blog.


Coming to the Party - thanks to the intervention of the RSS in the day to day affairs of the same - Modi is right now numero uno. Interestingly, while he has established early lead over his 'adversaries' within the party and the issue at hand is when to project him as PM candidate for the 2014 polls, the scenario as exists outside has become less enthusing now.

Take the case of recent passage of the Food Security Bill. As was reported Modi had written a letter to the Prime Minister, opposing the bill and it was expected that, the party would revise its stand, whose leader in the Lok Sabha Sushma Swaraj had initially agreed to support the bill, albeit with some amendments. The letter by Modi did create some doubts but ultimately Modi had to step back. As put by a JD(U) leader “In the passing of this bill, the biggest loser has been Narendra Modi."

The manner in which the 'Parikrama' issue fizzled out and the alleged 'fixing' between the VHP and the Samajwadi Party became evident is clear to everyone. People are openly saying that if Samajwadi Party had not put a 'ban' on the rally then VHP would have found itself further exposed. Despite all their attempts the VHP could organise only a few hundreds for this programme and all its wishes to raise heat over the Ayodhya issue just could not materialise. Hindutva's plan to further communalise the situation in the state and garner votes, lies punctured, as of now. As an aside it may be mentioned here that while Modi himself had refused to visit Ayodhya immediately after his anointment as Chief Campaign Manager of BJP - supposedly to give an added proof of his 'pro development' image - the first thing his assistant Amit Shah, as in-charge of UP did was to visit Ayodhya.

And now it is learnt that his much awaited London sojourn is also facing some rough weather.

While he could not hide his glee when British MP Barry Gardiner invited him to the United Kingdom- supposedly signaling end of his isolation in the western world because of his alleged complicity/inaction during the 2002 carnage - came the news that another UK MP has launched a protest against the invitation claiming that Modi will witness a "hot reception" in the country. It may be noted that George Galloway, who is an MP belonging to Respect Party has been a consistent critic of attack by US led coalition forces against Afghanistan and Iraq and a long time supporter of the Palestinian cause.

In an exclusive interview with CNN-IBN, George Galloway of the ‘Respect Party’ said: "Mr Modi, better come prepared with a spare jacket because I suppose the eggs and tomatoes will be flying," he said. Taking a dig at the Gujarat Chief Minister on the context of the 2002 riots, Galloway said, "I hope of course nothing more deadly than that. We wouldn't like to reduce ourselves to his level but it will be boistress, vocal and hot reception."The British MP said that his party will rally protesters to ensure the controversial visit "doesn't go unmarked".

As a recap, it may be recalled that it has been more than eleven years that he is yearning to visit the country but because of a consistent opposition put up by the secular forces there exposing his alleged role in the 2002 'riots' and with the British government denying any guarantee for his security the plan could never materialise. In fact, he had to cancel his last visit to UK looking at the massive protests which awaited him there accompanied by the inability shown by the British police to defend him who was to go on a private visit.(2005) And since the families of two British Muslim citizens who had been killed by the frenzied mobs in Gujarat in 2002 were contemplating to file a case against Modi in the British court then it was construed risky that he travels outside.

Coming back to this invite from UK, perhaps more worrying for him is news about the cancellation of Sukbhir Badal's proposed trip to Canada. Sukhbir Badal, deputy chief minister of Punjab had planned to visit Canada in the third week of September but as reported by the media, rights group were planning to move court there for his prosecution for allegations of 'human rights violations'. Groups like ‘Sikhs For Justice’ (SFJ) and Canadia Sikh Coalition (CSC), which represents more than 50 Gurdwaras and societies, had "..[a]lleged that as deputy CM and Home minister Sukhbir Badal commanded a police force that had committed, ordered, incited and abetted extra judicial killings of several Canadian Citizens in India, they would seek the prosecution and arrest warrants of Badal during his upcoming visit to Canada under the Criminal Code of Canada which provided that "every official, or every person acting at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of an official, who inflicts torture on any other person is guilty of an indictable offence". (http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-08-29/india/41579773_1_sukhbir-badal-kanwarpal-singh-dal-khalsa)

It need be added here that the group Sikhs for Justice which has recently opened a branch in Canada had filed a similar case against Sukbhbir Badal's father Punjab chief minister Parkash Singh Badal last year when he was planning to visit US in June, which had forced him to cancel the trip.

But why this cancellation of trip to Canada by a close ally of BJP has any import for Modi's proposed trip?


In an important write-up 'Narendra Modi, British Invitation And Universal Jurisdiction' (http://www.countercurrents.org/jayaram160813.htm) a senior journalist N Jayaram tells us why 'for human rights groups, the prospect of Modi's London visit is not a crisis but an opportunity.'

According to him

"Should he take up the invitation, they could move courts for his arrest and trial under the principle of Universal Jurisdiction for crimes against humanity.( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_jurisdiction) Although Universal Jurisdiction was not invoked in the 1998 arrest of Chile's former dictator Augusto Pinochet in London, it put worldwide focus on the principle. Judge Baltasar Garzon in Spain called for his arrest on the ground that some of the thousands of victims of human rights abuses in Chile after the 1973 coup were Spanish citizens. Britain's Law Lords ruled that Pinochet could not cite diplomatic immunity as certain crimes were too serious for that international arrangement to be invoked. Pinochet spent nearly a year and a half under mostly house arrest.

It may be mentioned here that Pinochet had to spend more than one and half years in London effectively under house arrest and his supporters in the western world like Margaret Thatcher - who had supported Pinochet's coup against the elected government of Salvador Allende and the bloodbath that followed and the then US President George Bush had to lobby hard for his release. He was 'freed on health grounds' despite protests from Jurists and medical experts. This incident was 'one of the greatest episodes in international legal history' and 'the words Universal Jurisdiction gained currency beyond the groves of academe.'

The author discusses few other examples where many leading personalities or army commanders had to cancel their trips abroad for similar fear of litigation. He talks about cancellation of former US president George W Bushs' trip to Switzerland (2011) in view of threat of large scale protests. " Amnesty International had asked the Swiss authorities to investigate his role in torture. Amnesty was told the authorities had no plans to prosecute Bush. But there have been rumblings in other countries including Spain and Germany, with threats of investigations against leading US officials for torture and other crimes against humanity."

It was the year 2005 when Doron Almog, a former Israeli army commander had to literally fly back from London without getting down from his aircraft as he was told that few Palestinian groups had moved court to get him charged with crimes against humanity. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7251954.stm). Similarly, Tzipi Livni ex foreign minister of Israel cancelled her proposed trip to Britain (2009) when reports came in that an arrest warrant was out for her role in alleged war crimes in Gaza. The author adds:

She was invited back by Foreign Secretary William Hague in 2011 after an amendment that prevents private individuals from seeking such arrests. The Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 might make it difficult for private individuals to call for Modi's arrest should he visit Britain. But nothing prevents foreign governments and judges from issuing warrants to be acted upon by the British authorities.

To be fair, Modi is not the only Indian politician whose visits elsewhere have become subjects of controversy. Jagdish Tytler, a senior Congress leader, who has been under scanner for his alleged role in anti-Sikh pogrom in 1984, was similarly dropped from a delegation (2009) which was to visit Britain following protests.

The author concludes with an observation:

“India has not signed the Rome Statute that established the International Criminal Court in 2002. China, the United States and Israel are among a number of countries that have chosen to stay out. Thus far the ICC, which has 122 members, has only been able to net perpetrators of mass crimes in Africa. The idea that crimes against humanity such as those that occurred in New Delhi in 1984 or Gujarat in 2002 need to be investigated and punished has yet to catch on in India. But it is an idea whose time may yet come.”

Subhash Gatade is the author of Pahad Se Uncha Aadmi (2010) Godse's Children: Hindutva Terror in India,(2011) and The Saffron Condition: The Politics of Repression and Exclusion in Neoliberal India(2011). He is also the Convener of New Socialist Initiative (NSI) Email : subhash.gatade@gmail.com



Comments are moderated