For a small (or, rather, tiny) region, Goa has influenced Indian (and sometimes South Asian) history in rather significant ways. It continues to do so right upto the current day. The latest controversy over “97 voters” from Goa, who were disallowed from entering the electoral rolls despite being entitled to, is only the latest case. It’s repeatedly in pan-Indian news.
Like the history or not, the fact that a tiny region has indeed played a significant role in various ways cannot but be noticed.
In the latest row over the functioning of the Central Election Commission, the Indian Express breaking news story highlighted the case of Goa. It was not just a question of “97 voters”, but rather how they were affected, and what their story signifies. Together with West Bengal, Goa kept repeatedly being highlighted and making headlines.
Some saw this as strange. “97 voters” are unlikely to affect any election result. But that is not the only issue.
I once worked in a bank, at an entry level job and for only a short while. Before closing each day, we needed to “tally” that all the debits for the day and ensure these exactly matched the total credits. Down to the last paisa. Even if one paisa was missing, we could not leave to go home. Things were done manually in those times.
The issue is not how much was the difference. Because even if one paisa was out-of-sync in the system, it tells you that something is wrong. And the error could actually run into millions... If all was right, all debits and credits should tally down to the last paisa. Similar with other systems which depend on accuracy and accountability. That was what I learn from my short stint in a bank.
But Goa’s story is not only about elections. When it comes to the history of the BJP’s rise across India, Goa has had (unwittingly, perhaps) not had a small role to play.
In 2002, Goa was the setting of a Vajpayee-Advani-Modi confrontation, at the BJP’s national executive in Goa. Vajpayee, then the PM, wanted Modi out as the chief minister of Gujarat, following the riots in that state. Advani stepped in, and was credited with ensuring Modi stayed on. Goa therefore became part of the story of Modi’s survival within the BJP.
Then, in 2009, then Goa Opposition leader Manohar Parrikar spoke out against Advani, comparing the latter to “rancid pickle”, after he turned 75, and had been at the helm of the BJP for long. (Parrikar later said his Konkani remarks had been twisted and denied the interpretation attributed to him, but this nonetheless played a key role in the rise of Modi.)
In 2013, Goa again became the scene of a decisive second Modi-Advani confrontation. Rajnath Singh, at the BJP’s Goa national executive, appointed Modi the chairman of the party election campaign. Later, in 2013 itself, Modi told a Goa gathering that the state had been “lucky” for him, and referred to the “licence” to run Gujarat in 2002.
But that’s not all. In 2016, just four days after the major Nov 8 demonetistaion was announced--which nobody talks about now--Modi was in Goa. He addressed a gathering, strongly justified the move and spoke of how it would right many wrongs.
It was in Goa that Mr Modi said: “Brothers and sisters, I have asked for only 50 days. Give me an opportunity until 30 December. After 30 December, if you find any mistake on my part, if there has been any deficiency in my work, if any improper intention of mine comes to light, then put me in the public square. I am ready to accept whatever punishment the country gives me. My countrymen, the world is moving forward, while this disease is destroying India... After 30 December, I promise to give you the India you want.”
Meanwhile, the Tarun Tejpal (Tehelka) case also affected the fate of the country, and, again, Goa was also critical to how it unfolded. On November 15, 2013, Cobrapost and Gulail released recordings alleging that the then Gujarat home minister Amit Shah had ordered the surveillance of a Bangalore-based lady architect, at the direction of a person referred to as ‘Saheb’. The Congress called this ‘Snoopgate’.
But before long, the Tejpal sexual-assault allegations went public on November 20 itself. on November 23, the Goa Police registered an FIR against Tejpal “based on material the police had obtained so far”. That set the tone for the media focus in the weeks ahead, with a crucial national elections coming on the horizon.
You could read this as a series of coincidences, or something more than that. But size is not the same as influence; despite its tiny footprint, Goa continues to play its role in history.
But the way, it’s not just in recent politics that Goa has been shaping the wider region around it. To recognise that, we perhaps need a deeper understanding of our past, and the honesty to accept it for what it was.
Ernestine Carreira, author of Globalising Goa, argues that after the advent of the British Raj, Goa was the capital of a European maritime empire “that teetered on the brink of collapse in the tumultuous seventeenth century”.
Yet, it managed to again become a thriving cultural, religious and diplomatic hub in the eighteenth century. It did so by building close relations with the “foremost colonial empires of the day -- Mughal, Maratha and Mysore”. The globalisation of trade in the eighteenth century again restored Goa’s former Atlantic ties via Brazil, and the African slave trade. Doors also opened for it to the Orient, via China and the opium markets.
Yet another example of a tiny region punching well above its weight. Could Goa be called the tail which wags the approx thousand times larger Indian dog?
This, of course, describes a situation where a small, less important part of a system ends up controlling or disproportionately influencing the much larger part. The image is deliberately absurd: normally, the dog wags its tail. But when the tail wags the dog, the relationship has been reversed. Give it a thought...
