'India: The Modi Question' | A sharp documentary with some blind spots

3.5/5

Examining the role of Prime Minister Narendra Modi in the proliferation of Hindu nationalism and increasing majoritarianism since 2002, the BBC has released a two-part documentary series, titled India: The Modi Question.

The first episode largely scrutinises Modi’s (then CM of Gujarat) foray into politics and his alleged complicity in the 2002 Gujarat violence that claimed more than 2,000 lives. The 58-minute-long episode gives a comprehensive picture of what happened in Godhra and the subsequent majoritarian violence across Gujarat. It makes the bold charge that Modi is “directly responsible” for the “climate of impunity” that led to the violence, and cites a hitherto unpublished report from the UK Foreign Office.

The Modi Question adheres to the grammar of documentary filmmaking giving space to all stakeholders. It posts a note in the beginning that the Indian government declined to comment on the allegations in the film, and about 30 people declined to go on record fearing for their safety. It shows an old interview with Modi where he lambasts collusion charges and says he needs no lessons on human rights from the Britishers. The only blame that he accepts is his “handling of media” during the violence.

BJP leaders such as Swapan Dasgupta, Subramanian Swamy and Swadesh Singh also appear in the documentary, defending their ideology and its flag-bearer. Talking for the victims, Imran Dawood, an Indian origin British national who lost his family to the violence, says the Indian authorities failed to bring the perpetrators to book. Several well-known authors, journalists, and activists such as Jill McGivering, Christophe Jafferlot, Nilanjan Mukhopadhyay, and others speak about the multiple layers of the violence.

The documentary says the riots had “all the hallmarks of ethnic cleansing” which also involved the “widespread and systematic rape of Muslim women”.

The second episode of the documentary focuses on Modi as India’s prime minister, highlighting the increasing number of hate crimes, abrogation of special rights in Kashmir, CAA-NRC (Citizenship Amendment Act -National Register of Citizens) and the violence against those who opposed them.

But the film hugely falters when it comes to assessing the government on areas other than majoritarianism—the dwindling economy, the undermining of independent institutions, the mishandling of the Covid-19 pandemic, and failures on the China border.

The Modi Question is incomplete as the majoritarianism push is directly linked to these debacles.

Also, the film’s understanding of Gujarat violence is limited to Godhra and its aftermath. It fails to recognise the majoritarianism arising from an intersection of caste, gender and religious hierarchies. The foreign gaze fails to comprehend this ‘Indian problem’.

An argument doing the rounds is that the film's revelations will help polarise society further. For a machinery that found the colour of an actor’s bikini polarising, it is easy to turn anything to further their narrative. Asking the minorities to “forget the old wounds and move on,” only delivers a raw deal to the victims but also makes new generations of Indians grow up largely unaware of a turning point in the country’s recent history.