When Nitish Kumar joined hands with BJP, was he not aware of the political philosophy of the BJP? Was he not aware that hard-line Hindutva had become the centre-stage as far as BJP's political philosophy was concerned?
But he joined hands with BJP because he knew he can't fulfill his dream of ruling Bihar on his own. Was it not a compromise with principles for the sake of power?
How can the same Nitish Kumar now say that he'll not compromise with principles for the sake of power? He has already done it in the past.
Also, When 2002 riots took place in Gujarat, Nitish himself was part of the union government.
Why did he not resign, like Ram Vilas Paswan did, after BJP refused to sack Modi as Gujarat CM, saying he will not compromise with principles for the sake of power?
There was a time when BJP's political opponents used to drive a wedge between Atal Behari Vajpayee and L K Advani by saying that only Vajpayee was secular in BJP and rest all were communal and Advani was their leader.
But did Vajpayee ever disagree with core philosophy of BJP and RSS? Was he himself not closely associated with RSS? Today the same Advani has become secular for leaders like Mulayam Singh Yadav and Nitish Kumar.
BJP's opponents, at that time, used to say that Vajpayee was a right man in the wrong party. Today same thing, but in reverse order, is being said by Nitish Kumar about Modi – Modi is a wrong man in the right party.
Both these statements reflect a cleverly crafted strategy of creating fissures in the BJP. Be it Vajpayee, Advani or Modi – they never differed on the core political philosophy of the BJP. Political opponents of BJP have always come up with divisive formulations to suit their own political interests and Nitish Kumar is doing the same. Otherwise, how can a party be secular if the leader is communal?
