Politicians don’t like to be reminded of the past. For them, it’s “a foreign country”. As LP Hartley put it “they do things differently there”. But that’s precisely what I intend to do today. As he tried and failed to forge a new alliance with the BJP, I want to recall what Naveen Patnaik said 15 years ago. Then I’ll leave you to come to your own conclusion. I interviewed him after the horrific killings of Christians in Kandhamal in 2008. Not only had they shaken the country, they’d battered Patnaik’s reputation. He badly needed to recover. This is how he presented himself.
“Every bone in my body is secular and I don’t think that any of those bones have been damaged.”
Six months later, before the national elections of 2009, he broke his nine-year alliance with the BJP. I interviewed him again.
NP: “It was important to break with the BJP because I don’t consider them any longer healthy for my state. After Kandhamal that is quite apparent, I think to everyone.”
KT: “You’re saying after Kandhamal you couldn’t have continued with the BJP under any circumstances?”
NP: “It had become very very difficult.”
KT: “So Kandhamal in a sense was a breaking point for you?”
NP: “Yes, indeed.”
This conversation went a lot further. Indeed, he was eager that should happen.
KT: “When Kandhamal happened the urban middle classes began to compare you with Narendra Modi. Some people even called you a second Narendra Modi. Did that upset, even hurt you?”
NP: “I myself could never personally consider myself anything like that. I always think in a secular manner. I have a totally secular background. So, I never considered that as a correct allegation.”
KT: “Which means that the comparison with Narendra Modi must have been deeply hurtful?”
NP: “I found it just unbelievable.”
It was clear how Patnaik saw the BJP post-Kandhamal but he had more to say. He wasn’t finished.
KT: “When I interviewed you after Kandhamal you said every bone in your body is secular. Would you say today the break with the BJP proves that to be the case?”
NP: “What do you think, Karan? You’ve known me all my life.”
KT: “I would say it proves the case.”
NP: “Thank you.”
My instinct told me I needed to ask another question. It delivered the clincher.
KT: “Was it (the break) done with that in mind?”
NP: “One always stands by one’s beliefs in the end, don’t you think? Or one should stand by one’s beliefs.”
There it was — clear, concise, convincing. Patnaik had nailed his colours. His beliefs had reasserted themselves. The old Naveen was back. The BJP ally was history.
KT: “Many people say it took Naveen Patnaik nine years to stand up for his beliefs. Those who know you have always known you are secular, liberal, modern. They were astounded that you actually had an alliance with the BJP and it lasted so long. Why did it take you so long to find your beliefs?”
NP: “You will have seen that for the last dozen years, the BJP has had a number of secular allies. Mamata Banerjee, (Ramakrishna) Hegde, Farooq Abdullah or even George Fernandes, Nitish Kumar. There were a number of secular allies. And, in Orissa, we were fortunate in the first eight years there were no communal incidents. It was not till Kandhamal that the whole picture changed.”
Now there’s only one question left. What has altered since? Having broken with the BJP and done so well thereafter, why was Patnaik thinking of returning? He doesn’t need them to win again.
That’s not all. The BJP he broke with was led by LK Advani. The BJP he wanted to return to is led by Narendra Modi.
I doubt I’ll ever be told but I would be intrigued to know how he justifies this aborted attempt. Meanwhile, I’ll leave you to come to your own conclusion. It’s possible some of you might feel you’ve guessed mine.
Karan Thapar is the author of Devil’s Advocate: The Untold Story. The views expressed are personal
