Explained: Can BJP Make Inroads in Tamil Nadu by Invoking Ram Mandir?

Whether it is Prime Minister Narendra Modi's frequent visits to Tamil Nadu temples, the placing of the Sengol in the new Parliament, or the alleged 'saffronisation' of the state's cultural icon Thiruvalluvar, the BJP has been desperately trying to make a political mark on the Tamil psyche in the run-up to the Lok Sabha elections.The party won no seats and polled merely 3.66 percent of the total votes in the state in the 2019 Lok Sabha elections – and now that it has lost its alliance partner AIADMK, it may even end up going solo. But with the Ram Mandir, the BJP appears to have found another means to a difficult end in Tamil Nadu. Incidentally, a day before the temple's consecration, Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman accused the ruling DMK government of "preventing Hindus from watching the live telecast" of the ceremony in Ayodhya – and dragged the matter to the courts, despite the latter clarifying there were no such restrictions.Speaking to The Quint, BJP TN vice-president Narayanan Thirupathy says, "The move by the Tamil Nadu government was arrogant, and it violated the fundamental rights of citizens. Rightly, the [Madras] High Court and the Supreme Court clearly said that they should not stop such events."Now, the question before the saffron party is: can it cash in on the Ram Mandir sentiment in Tamil Nadu by merely accusing the DMK government of 'encroaching on the rights of Hindus'? To answer this, we must take a look at the history, politics, and culture of Tamil Nadu."Since the beginning [of the Ram Janmabhoomi movement], the DMK has not necessarily seen 'Ram' as a representation of Indian nationalism – the way the BJP has," opines senior journalist and political commentator Madhavan Narayanan."Dravidian parties, especially the DMK, have their origins in the Dravida Kazhagam, led by Periyaar or EV Ramasamy. He was a rationalist who challenged the caste and Brahmanical order. During the high points of this movement, there have been attempts to perceive Ram as an Aryan from north India and Ravana as a dark-skinned Dravidian," Narayanan adds.In the early 1990s, when the Ram Janmabhoomi movement was at a fever pitch, the DMK made its stance against the building of a Ram Temple in Ayodhya amply clear. "They say Ram was born there 20 lakh years ago. Who saw that, I wonder? Who has written about it? Now by insisting that this is the exact place, how just is it to demolish Islamic history?" – this is what M Karunanidhi, DMK leader and late CM of Tamil Nadu, wrote, a day before the Babri Masjid was demolished by a frenzied mob of karsevaks on 6 December 1992.Cut to 19 January 2024, DMK Minister and Karunanidhi's grandson Udhayanidhi Stalin echoed his words, saying, "We don't have a problem with a temple coming up there, but we are not in agreement with the construction of a temple after demolishing a mosque."Udhayanidhi's statement is significant in two ways: its historical continuity, and the fact that it is relatively distinct from the political positions of some other members of the INDIA bloc, which the DMK is a part ofWhy is it historically congruent?In 1989, the DMK was strongly in support of the VP Singh-led coalition called 'National Front', which defeated Rajiv GandhiSingh implemented the Mandal Commission report, which was in line with the DMK's social justice idealsThen-BJP president LK Advani claimed he was forced to launch the Ram Janmabhoomi movement because the VP Singh government accepted the Mandal Commission reportThe DMK's stand then – like most other secular parties across India – was that the dispute should be resolved by mutual negotiation between the Hindu and Muslim communitiesAfter the demolition of Babri Masjid, Karunanidhi strongly condemned the incidentEven as communal flames engulfed most parts of the country, Tamil Nadu had no reported acts of violenceSpeaking to The Quint, senior journalist RK Radhakrishnan says: "Udhayanidhi has merely articulated the DMK's stance from since then. The party has been very consistent when it comes to the Ram Temple movement and the issues surrounding it.""Barring 2002, when it did not condemn what happened in Gujarat, it has been consistent when it comes to the question of minorities," he adds. This might primarily be because the party had forged an unlikely alliance with the BJP-led NDA between 1999 and 2003.So, how does the DMK's stand on Ram Mandir fit in the contemporary political landscape?In the run-up to the Ram Mandir inauguration, some other Opposition INDIA bloc members – including the Congress – said they would visit the newly built temple "as they are Hindus," but would not attend the ceremony because "the BJP was taking political advantage of the temple," making their stance somewhat different from that of the DMK. "What is important to understand here is that even in the non-Hindutva political spectrum, there is a wide range of opinions. For instance, [TN Chief Minister] MK Stalin may be an atheist, but Digvijaya Singh of the Congress is a very staunch Hindu. But he says he is politically secular, and that Hinduism is his own business. So, there are ideological differences within the secular spectrum, too."Madhavan NarayananNarayanan adds: "The sentiments in favour of the temple are much stronger in the north, so the northern leaders are softer or restricted in the way they are going about it, whereas the DMK feels no such compulsion. Tamil Nadu has a strong tradition of rationalism and heterodoxy, but the current political climate in the north is leaning toward the orthodox Sanatana Dharma, which Udhayanidhi had called out recently." Sanatana Dharma Row: How Udhayanidhi Stalin's Remark Reflects On 'INDIA' BlocThe other major Dravidian party in Tamil Nadu AIADMK, on the other hand, has had a different approach to the Ram Janmabhoomi movement.AIADMK's J Jayalalithaa was the CM of Tamil Nadu when Babri Masjid was demolished in 1992She had actively expressed her support for the Ram Mandir movement but had also called for a mosque to be built at the disputed siteKarunanidhi had even accused Jayalalithaa of sending karsevaks to demolish Babri Masjid, which the latter had vehemently deniedDuring Jayalalithaa's time, the AIADMK had forged brief alliances with the BJP in 1998 and 2004. Post her death, the parties mended their ties in 2019, only to part ways again in September 2023 owing to AIADMK's differences with BJP state chief Annamalai.On Wednesday, 24 January 2024, AIADMK general secretary Edappadi K Palaniswami said that "people won't vote for the BJP just because a temple was built." The leader, who had also skipped the consecration ceremony, went on to add, as per TOI: "Not just temples, we have extended support for the construction of mosques and churches too. The AIADMK is beyond religion and caste."BJP Tamil Nadu vice-president Narayanan Thirupathy says that in the upcoming Lok Sabha elections, the party will focus on "the Narendra Modi government's achievements over the last 10 years.""We will also expose the anti-Hindu stand of the DMK government in Tamil Nadu. One of BJP's major promises was to construct a Ram Temple at his birthplace. What we had promised the people of India, we have delivered," he tells The Quint.He adds that unlike the DMK, "Ramayana and Ram are connected to the hearts of the Tamil Nadu people. Even the so-called atheist Periyar has 'Rama' in his actual name. It is not right to say that Tamil Nadu doesn't pay enough attention to Ram temple; they have greeted this Ram temple like other fellow Indians."Speaking to The Quint, Ramu Manivannan, author and professor at University of Madras, opines: The BJP has already – politically, culturally, and religiously – exploited the northern psyche. It just wants to reinforce that in the South using Ram Mandir."He says that by raking up the issue of the live telecast, "the BJP is trying to turn this into public issue – a common civil society issue. But I don't believe it can work in TN the same way as it does in the North. Certainly, there is a difference in the political development and social modernisation – all of these are important factors, which are radically different in the North and the South."Radhakrishnan, meanwhile, adds that while it is "true that the general population of Tamils are god-fearing and a lot of them visit temples, they do not believe in making a god the icon of a political party.""God for them is something personal, someone who gives them solace when they face problems. It has nothing to do with the political party they vote for," he adds.Manivannan concurs, saying: "The Tamil Nadu public isn't against Lord Ram, but I don't believe they need to know Lord Ram through the BJP."

BECOME A MEMBER

Explained: Can BJP Make Inroads in Tamil Nadu by Invoking Ram Mandir?

"The TN public isn't against Ram, but I don't believe they need to know Ram through BJP," a political expert says.