PM’s remarks at G20 Summit on ‘One Earth’ at Bharat Mandapam, in Pragati Maidan, New Delhi on September 09, 2023.
Counterpoint: Bharat that was India!
By Vivekanand Jha*
Speculations galore ever since the invitation cards of the G20 summit from President Draupadi Murmu omitted the reference to ‘India’ and replaced it with ‘Bharat’. At the G20 Summit, too, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, unconventionally though, exhibited ‘Bharat’ in place of India in the nameplate.
Significantly, the derogatory comments of Udaynidhi Stalin, the son of the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, come in handy. He equated Sanatan Dharma with Malaria and Dengue and his father Stalin of the Dravida Munnetra Kazagham (DMK) party promptly endorsed it. This could be seen in the perspective of the ongoing slugfest of war of words over the prospects of renaming India as Bharat.
Bharat, in all its conceivable logic and rationale, connotes the sacred land of Sanatan Civilization, whereas India, notwithstanding its multiple interpretations, has a direct connection with colonialism. In Rig Veda, there is a reference to Bharat, however, there is hardly any reference to India. Thus the reference to Hindu or Indu, could not be taken as the source of the genesis of the so-called India.
Even for the sake of argument, if it is presumed that India existed before the British arrived, the fact cannot be denied that the vast landscape of Jamboo Dweepa, had begun to be referred to as India by the British. Moreover, Bharat traces its genesis from the word Bharat, a noble king, who anointed a commoner as his successor, rather than his son, to rule after him. This was something unprecedented in the history of the nation. Significantly, the path of renunciation, which the geographical boundary of Bharatvarsha so evocatively coveted, finds its reflection in the name Bharat.
Significantly, this conspicuous omission of ‘India’ from President Murmu’s invitation cards and Prime Minister Modi’s nameplate at the G20 Summit, precedes a Special Session of Parliament scheduled between September 18 to 22, 2023.
This has already added grist to the mill that the avowed purpose of convening this session definitively has something to do with the name change of the nation, especially when the government has refused to specify the purpose for convening such a special session.
The Indian Constitution under Article 1, explicitly professes the fact of India being Bharat as it says, ‘India that is Bharat’, unequivocally, upholds the sanctity of India being Bharat.
But to completely wipe out India from its pages will have its ramifications and there will be costs involved too.
The Opposition ostensibly perceives it as nothing short of political shenanigans of the Modi government to win certain brownie points by orchestrating the change in name. The ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its allies find no anomaly in making the required course correction and quite a few members of the ruling party have actually taken the plea that this course correction was overdue; in fact, this step, they feel, should have been initiated at the time when the country got independence.
The India versus Bharat debate has even transcended the national boundary and has its reverberations across the world and a question in this regard was asked to Farhan Haq, the deputy spokesperson of the United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres during an official press conference. “Obviously, if we get requests like that, we consider them as they come,” he said.
Turkey changed the name to Türkiye last year and made a formal request to the UN to consider the new name to which the UN responded. Even the example of Burma changing it to Myanmar is a living testimony of the same.
Interestingly, Prime Minister Modi, prior to the commencement of the G20 Session in Delhi, purportedly restrained his party leaders from passing any comment on this issue, except those authorised to speak on the same, to do talking on this issue.
As for the Opposition block I.N.D.I.A, the nomenclature given to the rag-tag coalition, it has a genuine objection to the name change of the geographical boundary of Bharatvarsha from ‘ India’ to ‘Bharat’.
The question though remains whether against this backdrop, the renaming of India as Bharat is justified. The timing of the same may be a subject of interpretation, in view of the impending general elections. However, in hindsight, the transition of India to Bharat does look apt and a well-calculated move. It certainly has many buyers!
