TeaThe BBC documentaryModi’s question‘ has raised old questions, provoked the latest calls by Indian digital warriors to sack the broadcaster, and now even block it on social media platforms. Yet for all the domestic sound and fury, the main outcome of the documentary’s telecast is for India’s position in the game on the global stage.
The ongoing controversy over the documentary highlights the highly risky nature of India’s new image wars. If Prime Minister Narendra Modi has chosen to be the strongman of our era, that image is now pitted against India’s greatest asset of soft power, namely multicultural liberal democracy.
But first, what is it about this documentary that sets it apart from other reportage that has been around for some time?
Read also: 2022 was the year when the world turned against strong politics. Connect India is India’s chance
bbc attack
The BBC documentary on the 2002 violence in Gujarat is striking for three reasons. Not one that has anything to do with competitive demonology.
One, the documentary is based on an official government report from the UK Foreign Office. Two, the interview with former British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw is candid, and he is forthright in his judgement. Finally, as a piece of investigative journalism, it appeared on a public service broadcaster as opposed to a private provider. Precisely because it is a product of the British establishment, which makes this documentary distinctly official.
This documentary is not the result of a heart-wrenching liberal, who is commonly associated in our time with being sympathetic to ‘human rights’ and regularly abused. Certainly, human rights activists are as endangered in Britain as they are arguably in India. The same goes for the BBC, which has been at odds with the government led by the ruling Conservative Party for a long time. Despite the current climate, the series is quintessential BBC – raw and chilling footage matched by clips and neutral commentary.
Above all, the documentary has given full and equal space to Modi’s supporters, as former BJP Rajya Sabha MP Swapan Dasgupta, among others, debunks several key claims throughout the episode. In fact, Dasgupta has the last word in the first episode as he seeks ‘closure’ on this major event in India’s recent history.
Ironically, it is the ruling BJP and its supporters who will be the principal agents in giving the documentary a bigger and longer life than any of Modi’s critics and detractors.
History, both recent and otherwise, testifies that the best way to preserve the life of a text, image or word is to have it blocked or banned by a powerful government. Look no further than Salman Rushdie satanic verses, which is easily the most remembered novel written by him. And he wrote a lot, and it’s not even his best novel in my opinion! Or indeed, MK Gandhi’S Hind Swaraj Or even VD Savarkar’s actions would have been accomplished with less gusto which was born out of sheer intrigue had he not been banned. This is an obvious point, but one clearly missed by the zealous censor-minded mandarins of our time. So, if the BBC continues to air the documentary and garner attention, the British broadcaster has only the Indian government to thank for it.
Read also: Why Yogi Can Remember Shamshad Begum As BJP Minister, Legislators Hit Out At UP IAS Officers
soft power or strongman
By blocking any dissemination or mention of the BBC documentary on social media platforms, Modi has reinforced his image and actions as a strongman. Since the most famous slogan of Indian democracy, ‘Indira is India’, only Modi has come close to realizing the nation.
Modi’s latest avatar is ‘global’ Teacher‘ either ‘Vishwaguru‘ has raised the stakes of the image game very high.
Blocking the documentary will undoubtedly vindicate Modi’s fervent and even insatiable base of supporters, who have denounced it as ‘colonial’ and ‘white’ propaganda. So far, so predictable. After all, for some years now, social media warriors and the more vocal supporters of Modi and the BJP have been plundering the global Left’s lexicon for their own obsessive parochial culture wars.
His call for ‘decolonising’ India’s cultural and other symbols is a complete 180-degree flip from the demands of the global Left to do the same with royal legacies in the West. It is a matter of grave irony and poverty of ideas as the cultural warriors of India are yet to build up their vocabulary!
All this bombshell and obstruction could strengthen Modi’s electoral base. But it will likely extract the cost that Modi gets the most. his international image.
India’s rising position in the world today is directly linked to its status as a multicultural democracy. Simply put, it is precisely because India is not China that today makes India a more sought-after partner in the reshaping world order. But despite India’s massive scale of 1.4 billion people and counting, not having a China is not enough.
Undoubtedly, it is India’s much-cherished diversity, independence and liberal and constitutional democracy that remain its strongest trump cards on the global stage.
You just have to remember the words of Indira Gandhi richard nixon At the height of the Cold War and the formation of Bangladesh. Also, his government did not hesitate to seek technical or financial assistance from America. She was soft power in hard action. Indira Gandhi’s reputation was badly affected during the Emergency, and many speculate that she perpetrated it to end her and India’s global isolation, among other reasons. all this when she wasn’t playing Teacher for the world!
In 2023, as world leaders make their way to Delhi as part of the G20 presidency, India will be keenly watched. Relatedly, as the proceedings of the BJP’s recently concluded national executive made clear, Modi’s latest campaign for the 2024 elections will be based on his towering personality on the global stage. Furthermore, Modi has repeatedly presented himself as an ideal mediator in the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia (the other leader to do so is Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan). So far, there has been little gain.
The Ukraine war has, if anything, doubled down on the so-called West’s commitment to pluralism and liberal democracy. Individual democracies too, from Brazil to the US and Britain, seem weary of homegrown populism as they reject the brash style of strongman leaders.
Strictly following and micromanaging what Indian audiences do or do not see shows authority, not moral power. Modi’s supporters probably get irritated by calling BBC by various names. It damages the personality of a democratic India, as it equally destroys India’s soft power. Blocks and name-calling can make nativists feel strong and populists feel thoroughly popular. But Modi with ’56 inch chest’ has now clashed with Modi Vishwaguru, His domestic followers may not care for the conflict or may even see this contradiction as a ‘masterstroke’ to celebrate.
Only that you cannot be a world leader without the world, just as you cannot be world famous in India.
Shruti Kapila is Professor of Indian History and Global Political Thought at the University of Cambridge. She tweets @shrutikapila. Thoughts are personal.
(Edited by Tarannum Khan)