By Mahesh Kumar Rathi
The question of women’s reservation is not merely a legislative issue before Indian democracy; it is also a decisive question that shapes the direction of power, ideology, and social justice. However, the manner in which the Bharatiya Janata Party has presented this issue transforms it from a struggle for women’s rights into a political weapon. It is becoming increasingly clear that women’s reservation is being used not for genuine transformation, but to construct a carefully designed political narrative—where the objective is not to enact a law, but to corner the opposition.
By linking this bill to the census and delimitation, the BJP has already nullified its immediate effectiveness. This is not a routine technical provision; it is a calculated political move. The government was fully aware that it lacked the required two-thirds majority for a constitutional amendment, and that the opposition would object to such conditions. Under these circumstances, it is difficult to believe that the bill was introduced to be passed; rather, it appears it was brought in to fail—so that the blame could be shifted onto the opposition, while the BJP presents itself as a “champion of women.”
The Prime Minister’s recent address to the nation further exposes this strategy. The way women’s reservation was projected as a historic achievement while simultaneously targeting the opposition makes it evident that the bill was part of political staging. This is a kind of politics where substantive policy is sidelined, and symbolic gestures are used to influence public opinion.
This entire episode cannot be separated from the historical ideology of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. From its early days, the RSS has advocated for centralized power and expressed suspicion toward the federal structure. During the framing of the Constitution, articles published in its organ Panchjanya questioned the very existence of provincial assemblies and the foundational spirit of the Constitution. This was not merely ideological disagreement, but opposition to a democratic framework that sought to accommodate India’s diversity.
Today, when delimitation and the redistribution of seats are discussed, it is no longer just an administrative process. It can become a tool for rebalancing political power. When this is linked to a crucial issue like women’s reservation, it deepens the suspicion that it may be another step toward implementing the long-standing agenda of a “strong centralized state.”
History shows that the same ideological current has often stood against progressive reforms concerning women’s rights. The Hindu Code Bill, introduced by B. R. Ambedkar to grant women rights in property, marriage, and inheritance, faced sharp opposition from the RSS and its affiliated organizations. During that time, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, associated with Panchjanya, described the bill as an “attack on the family structure.” This opposition was not merely about preserving tradition—it was a resistance to women’s autonomy and equality.
Today, when the same forces speak in favour of women’s reservation, it is natural to question whether this reflects genuine commitment or merely a political façade. If the intent were sincere, the bill would not have been tied to conditions that push its implementation into an uncertain future. If the commitment was real, serious efforts would have been made to build broad, cross-party consensus.
Instead, what we see is a contradiction: on one hand, proclamations are made in the name of “women’s empowerment,” and on the other, attempts are made to revive traditional social structures under the banner of “Sanatan culture,” structures that have historically restricted women’s freedom. This contradiction is not accidental; it is part of a continuous ideological framework that stands in tension with modern democratic values.
To understand the politics of the BJP and the RSS, one must look not only at what they say, but also at what they do and how they do it. In the case of women’s reservation, it is increasingly getting evident that the issue is being used not to ensure genuine representation for women, but as a political tool—where even failure can be converted into strategic success.
The greatest challenge before Indian democracy today is to distinguish between symbolic politics and real social transformation. Women’s reservation is not merely about seats; it is about equal participation in power. It cannot be allowed to become part of a political game at any cost.
If this illusion is not understood today, tomorrow it will not remain confined to women’s rights alone—it will affect the entire democratic structure. Therefore, it is essential to view women’s reservation in its true context—as a right, not as a political instrument. (IPA Service)
