Award-returnees must reconsider their position
President Pranab Mukherjee's recent statements on the need to foster tolerance in the country had been latched on to by the ‘secularist' brigade, including those who have returned their awards to protest against what they consider as “growing intolerance” after Mr Narendra Modi became the Prime Minister. They had read (wrongly) into those remarks an indictment of the present regime's approach to the nation's multi-cultural diversity. Now they must also heed the President's sentiment that awards must be “cherished” and “valued” and that they should offer a “balanced” expression to stray unfortunate incidents in society.
Speaking at a function organised by the Press Council of India on the occasion of the National Press Day, Mr Mukherjee said that “emotions should not overrun reasons and disagreements should be expressed through debate and discussion”. This has precisely been the Union Government's stand from the time certain people from the fields of academia, literature, science, films and other performing arts began returning their awards. While the protesters had the right to feel outraged and upset by incidents of intolerance, both violent and verbal, and hold the belief that the Government wasn't doing enough, the best recourse would have been to seek a meeting with the Prime Minister, air their anguish, and ask for strong action against the culprits.
They are eminent personalities and it was unlikely that the Prime Minister's Office would have turned down their request for an audience with the Prime Minister. But they preferred instead to take the extreme measure of returning awards, speaking out in public against the regime and projecting a distorted image of the country before the world as their first choice. This vitiated the environment for a meaningful discussion. What made matters worse was that some of the award-returnees were pathologically opposed to Prime Minister Modi, and a few among them were signatories to a petition that had opposed Mr Modi's prime ministership. To add further, quite a few of the award-returnees have open political leanings.
But it is still not too late to undo the damage. There are sensible elements among those who have surrendered their awards that are willing to find a respectable way out of the situation. They must take the lead, interact with the other camp within their fraternity which has opposed the return of the awards, and open communications with the Centre. One high-profile personality from the anti-award-return camp has offered his services for mediation, and it must be considered. This is no occasion to stand on prestige.
The Government too should take fresh steps to assure the protesters that it is willing to discuss the issue with them. All that’s needed is an open mind. It has been reported that at least one prominent award-returnee has been contacted by the Prime Minister's Office for an appointment with the Prime Minister, but he wants the invitation to include a few others as well. The Government can only hope to meaningfully engage with those who are open to reason. Agenda-driven protesters are a hopeless case because their salvation lies in visceral hatred of a leader whom a vast majority of the people have chosen to govern the country.