Being Advani

Advani era is ending: I feel a little sympathy for him.

He and Vajpayee started out roughly at the same time. Advani isn't a bad orator, but Vajpayee was a genius. People who had no affinity for Hindutva could fall in love with him, such was his oratory. Both were never in power in the early years, so both remained untainted.

Vajpayee could draw audiences, but the party didn't grow. Then in 1989 it rediscovered Ram Mandir issue; and with Advani's rathyatra, BJP arrived as a national party. With 89 MPs. Vajpayee would have been a misfit riding a chariot behind trishul-wielding mobs. Advani managed not to look stupid while doing that. But neither could he approve, openly, of the destruction of the mosque. Vajpayee simply distanced himself from it. Murli Manohar Joshi rejoiced. Advani probably didn't care whether the mosque stood there or not. He said, in a public statement, that it was the saddest day in his life.

In any case, it sealed his image as a hardliner who presided over a "barbaric" act (Jyoti Basu's word). But BJP needed Babri! But for the Mandir movement, party couldn't have won the Hindi heartland. Now New Delhi -- power in the centre -- loomed closer.But Babri, standing or not standing, wasn't enough to win a decisive victory. In Vajpayee they had a leader with a pan-India appeal. He could attract allies. Even those who were disgusted by saffron mobs could see shades of Nehru in Vajpayee. So Vajpayee became the prime minister.Vajpayee wasn't fighting fit; and soon Advani could have succeeded to the throne.

Before that could happen, unimaginably, the throne was lost to Sonia's UPA! And five years later, under Advani's leadership, BJP returned to where it was in 1989.

Advani could be called a hardliner, but he isn't a blood-thirsty demagogue. He even understands the limits of identity politics in India. After 2004 defeat, he tried to take BJP on a different course. But there was tremendous resistance, and Advani had to back off. In fact blame lies with Vajpayee. He had enough popular support to take on RSS and reform BJP. He didn't do that. He just retired. Advani didn't have the charisma and popularity which the job of reforming required.

All said, he was a decent man, a good parliamentarian, in Nehruvian tradition. He wouldn't have been a bad prime minister. As Lalu Prasad said, it wasn't his destiny.