India and Bharat: A tale of national co-existence

An invitation from the President’s office to G20 leaders for a dinner that describes Droupadi Murmu as the “President of Bharat”—rather than of “India”—has sparked off a war of words between the ruling party and the opposition, with the latter spying in it a trial balloon to rename the country. To be sure, “Bharat” has been used in other official missives as well, even from the Prime Minister. But today’s air of politics as general elections loom means political plots are seen to thicken easily. So intrigue over the agenda of a special session of Parliament called by the government, first thought to be about a single cycle for central and state polls, made space for speculation over a proposal to replace ‘India’ with ‘Bharat’ (at the UN, for example). While no such move is in evidence so far, the rhetoric of politicians has echoed the nominal split of the expected electoral face-off: the Bharatiya Janata Party-led NDA versus the so-called INDIA alliance looking to oust it from power. It is almost as if spin doctors on both sides want the arena to resound with chants of either ‘Bharat’ or ‘India.’ Zoom out for a less reductive view, however, and the fuss being raised would look like a maelstrom in a teacup.

The use of Bharat is in consonance with the Constitution, whose Article 1 refers to our country as “India, that is Bharat,” even as its Hindi version uses ‘Bharat’ as an equivalent throughout. Both names have been valid ever since ‘We the People’ adopted them. Even in regular use, the linguistic context has long cued the choice. Typically, Hindi and many other languages have used the name that the Centre seems to favour, while English and others—including local tongues—have gone with the one that’s more familiar to the wider world. Our linguistic diversity lends itself to pluralist overlaps of expression and fluent blends of vocabulary, so both names stir sentiments of national belonging. As it happens, Rightist nationalism also has religion in its mix, and the advocacy of Bharat by its ideologue M.S. Golwalkar may have given this name a Hindu hue in some eyes. At times of passions being stoked by ugly words spoken on matters of faith—Sanatan Dharam was recently likened to an illness by a Tamil Nadu politician who refused to retract his hate speech—it would be unfortunate if the way we speak and write about our country became yet another divisive wedge. It is up to people to resist being provoked by poll potboilers. The BJP would like objections to the use of ‘Bharat’ be seen as revealing a “colonial mindset,” while it suits the opposition to portray the Centre’s pick as a sign of the INDIA pact giving it a scare.

Where should We the People stand as our country’s name becomes a rallying point for political ends? With the openness assured by the Constitution, for one, and the ‘brand logic’ of snuggling into as many hearts and minds as possible, for another. Although the Hindi heartland’s ‘Bharat’ has its southern derivatives, such as “Bharatham” in Tamil, ‘India’ has appeal and familiarity across a wider span of the country’s landmass. It makes sense, then, to let unity-in-diversity guide decisions of national identity. Both Bharat and India are valid names, even if political parties vary in how they calibrate their emphasis for votes, and there is no need to unsettle this old consensus. Both names have been in cozy co-existence. And the linguistic inclusion of this formula has served us well.

Catch all the Business News, Market News, Breaking News Events and Latest News Updates on Live Mint. Download The Mint News App to get Daily Market Updates. More Less

Updated: 06 Sep 2023, 10:00 PM IST