The quick withdrawal of its two affidavits before the Supreme Court is a very sensible political move by the Manmohan Singh Government. Probably, in the first place, a more watchful government would never have allowed filing an affidavit that says Lord Ram is a fictional character. The Centre did not require to make such a statement at all through the two affidavits, articulating its position in connection with a legal challenge to its decision to undertake the Sethusamudram project – construction of a navigable canal through the Palk Strait that cuts through the Ram Sethu or Adam’s Bridge. The affidavit filed by the Archeological Survey of India (ASI), cleared by its nodal ministry of culture, virtually sought to open another Pandora’s Box as it conveyed its views on the existence of Ram Sethu.

That the Ramayana is a great mythological text is well acknowledged. What the ASI did, however, was to needlessly appear as raising fundamental questions about a core Hindu religious belief system. There was no need for the ASI to go further and affirm before the court that there is no historical evidence about the existence of Lord Ram. So if Ram did not exist in reality, there could be little justification for upholding the contention of those who have questioned before the apex court, the government’s decision to dredge the Ram Sethu area to make way for the Sethusamudram project. The ASI could have simply confined itself to giving a technical explanation as did the other affidavit filed by the shipping ministry.  

The ASI argument could have been acceptable but for its troubling lack of appreciation of the compelling political context, if not the sentiments of believers, involved in the reasons for questioning what is otherwise a pure and simple development project in the apex court. It is naïve to assume that the opportunity to question such a formulation on Ram would be missed by the BJP and Sangh Parivar. Rightly, the Manmohan Singh Government immediately realised the situation’s explosive political implications. Thus, besides withdrawing the affidavits, it also conveyed its move to review the entire issue in the context of the sensibilities involved. The DMK, which has been in the forefront of pushing for the project, may not be particularly happy with the development. However, being an important stakeholder in the UPA government, the party must realise that it would not be in its interest to stoke a political crisis for the ruling alliance when a mid-term poll appears on the horizon.