BJP backs Laxman over Sania Mirza remark; blames 'media distortion'

Information and Broadcasting Minister Prakash Javadekar’s statement that Sania Mirza is India’s pride may have given the impression that the central party leadership has distanced itself from K Laxman’s objections to the tennis star being appointed brand ambassador of the newly created state of Telangana. But the fact remains that the organisational structure of the BJP, state and central, is not disowning the sentiments expressed by its Telangana legislature party leader. [caption id=“attachment_1631749” align=“alignleft” width=“380”]  Sania Mirza is married to Pak cricketer Shoaib Malik[/caption] BJP national general secretary Murlidhar Rao told Firstpost that the Telangana Rashtra Samiti-led Telangana government had been indulging in “double speak” for some time and that Sania Mirza’s appointment as brand ambassador was just a further manifestation of that “same pattern”. Also, Rao does not see any contradiction between Javadekar’s position and the stated position of Telangana BJP leader K Laxman. “The Telangana BJP is not saying that she is not the pride of India. But there are several others too, of relatively less privileged background, who are also the pride of India. The issue here is of the double speak by the Telangana government. A person born outside of Telangana in 1986 becomes a 100 percent true Hyderabadi but the same is not applicable to hundreds of others who are born in Telangana (but are not extended domicile benefits) just because their forefathers were either not born or had not been living in the state on November 1, 1956, the date when the Andhra Pradesh state was created," he said. Sania being dubbed as the “daughter-in-law of Pakistan” by Laxman has become a politically contentious flashpoint. The controversy is not to the liking of the BJP but it does not seem to be worried about it either. Senior leader Murli Manohar Joshi may have spoken against Laxman, “If someone says this, it reflects his culture,” Joshi said. But other party leaders Firstpost spoke to were not on the defensive. They instead blame the media for “distortion” and for digressing from the real issue. Senior Congress leader and Rajya Sabha MP V Hanumantha Rao has said that Sania did not speak out on the issue of statehood for Telangana, apart form the fact that she is married to a Pakistani. “People will not appreciate this decision,” Rao said. This statement has come in handy for the BJP to claim that sentiments expressed by their Telangana party leader Laxman were not out of sync with prevailing popular sentiments in the state. The BJP leaders sense a pattern in ruling the TRS’s promise to give 12 percent reservation to the Muslim community in jobs and admissions in educational institutions, followed by the decision to pick Sania Mirza as brand ambassador. TRS chief and Telangana chief minister K Chandrashekher Rao’s daughter and MP K Kavitha’s statement a few days ago that Jammu & Kashmir and Telangana (the princely state of Hyderabad) were forcefully annexed by India in 1947 is seen in the same context. Laxman had accused the government of taking the step with an eye on the minority community votes in the upcoming elections to the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation. The other problem, which no BJP or Congress leader is officially talking about, is the Rs 1 crore cheque that Sania was given by the Telangana chief minister. While it is yet not known what role she will have as brand ambassador, the compensation she received has raised eyebrows. Amitabh Bachchan as brand ambassador for Gujarat tourism and Madhuri Dixit who become ambassador for Madhya Pradesh’s anti-infant mortality campaign Mamta Abhiyaan reportedly did not charge any money. Baba Ramdev was made brand ambassador by the Bihar government in 2006 but no money was offered to him. It’s a different matter though that Ramdev didn’t do anything as brand ambassador for Bihar. Beyond the daughter of India versus daughter-in-law of Pakistan rhetoric lies the Telangana government’s decision to reimburse the fees of poor students including those pursuing expensive technical courses but only if their parents had been living there for not less than the last 58 years, from November 1, 1956. Roughly, this means that only students with three generations of their family in Andhra Pradesh would be eligible for this scheme. The BJP claims that this is contrary to the directions of the Supreme Court on domicile. It is most unfortunate that Sania, a role model for many in the younger generations and who has earned laurels for the country, has been dragged into a political cross fire, that too when she thought she would be better serving the state she belongs to.