For example, G V L Narasimha Rao, noted political commentator and former member of the BJP’s national executive termed Nitish Kumar’s remarks as “flawed and treacherous” and suggested that BJP should be ready to contest the 2014 elections alone.

He fully backed Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi to be the prime ministerial candidate for 2014 Lok Sabha elections. Rao argues that “Muslims’ rapid opposition to the BJP has indeed proved to be beneficial to it electorally,” thus suggesting that polarisation of electorate on communal lines has proved beneficial for BJP.

Party ideologue M G Vaidya raised the questions: Who is secular? And what is secularism?

He said that “the two extreme points are represented by two Chief Ministers of our country. One is the Chief Minister of Bihar Shri Nitish Kumar and the other is Shri Narendra Modi Chief Minister of Gujarat.”
“According to me, the whole debate is uncalled for, because no individual is secular, unless he is an atheist. Ancient Charvaka and modern Karl Marx, may be cited as two prominent examples of secular human beings.”

He questioned the secular credential of Sonia Gandhi by stating that she is a Roman Catholic.

“Can the Chief Ministers of Maharashtra from high profile Sharad Pawar to the present lacklustre Prithviraj Chavan be called secular persons, when on every yearly Ashadh-ekadashi (the eleventh day of the bright fortnight of the fourth month of the Hindu calendar) they religiously perform the ‘Pooja’ of Lord Vitthal at Pandharpur. Or for that matter Lalu Prasad Yadav, the so-called quintessence of secularism, be called secular, when he takes interest in the ‘Chchat Pooja.’ What I want to emphasise is that only a person like Charvaka or Marx can be secular. Most of us are non-secular.”

But then he went on to add that “A political system can be secular. A State can be secular. I even emphatically assert that the State has to be secular. A non-secular or a theocratic state is a perversity, a contradiction in terms. In India this has been the case from ancient times. We have not borrowed that concept from the British. Even Shivaji’s rule was secular. In the seventh century king Harshwardhan’s rule was secular. He himself being a Sanatani Vedic Hindu, honoured saints of the Jain and the Buddhist saints also. Just consider why India is a secular state and not Pakistan or Bangladesh, though, they, too, were parts of the united India under the British rule. The reason is, India could proclaim itself a secular state, because Hindus are in a majority here. We did not became a secular state after 1976 when Smt. Indira Gandhi unnecessarily pierced the word ‘secular’ in the Preamble of our Constitution.”

“Now about the Nitish episode. Why did Nitish raise the issue of the Prime Minister of India, just now? The LS elections are two years away. Next month we have an election for Presidentship. Then follows Gujarat state assembly election. Then in 2013, we have assembly elections in several states like Delhi, Rajasthan, MP, Chhattisgarh, Karnataka etc. Then will follow the LS elections in 2014. Why is Nitish in such a haste? If he wants to severe his party’s ties with the NDA, he can do it, any time. Even now, his party has chalked out a different path for the Presidential poll. If he entertains an ambition to became the next PM, he is free to aspire for it. He is also free to amuse himself with his personal opinion about Narendra Modi.

But what is the meaning of pressurising BJP to declare its PM candidate? And why should BJP oblige him? The relevent polls are two years ahead. If Nitish can proclaim and propagate for a secular PM, what harm is their for the Sarsanghchalak of RSS to say that the next PM can be a devotee of Hindutva. He will surely guarantee that his state-craft will be genuinely secular and not like the one that is practised today—a practice that makes a distinction between one religion and the other.”

The article by former Govenor of Bihar Justice (Retd.) Dr M Rama Jois, who is at present Rajya Sabha MP of BJP, questioned the very intention behind the statement of Nitish Kumar.

“The call for secular credentials itself is uncalled for, unwarranted and motivated, for all national parties and their leaders are secular except others who indulge in caste and religious pollution of politics, which alone is anti-secular as stated by Justice Ramaswamy of Supreme Court in SR Bommai case. There is not even an iota of allegation against Narendra Modi who is ruling Gujarat for a decade that he is discriminating any one on grounds of religion and Gujarat is also free from communal riots. Innumerable attempts made to indict him for post Godhra riots became futile for the reason those riots were on account of angry reaction of the people to the inhuman burning of 60 Ayodhya pilgrims alive at Godhra railway station.”

As RSS is BJP’s guardian organization anything carried in its mouthpiece and that too so ruthlessly suggests something serious. Nitish Kumar has helped the Sangh Parivar close its rank under Narendra Modi. Till a month back its leaders were squabbling over Sanjay Joshi episode.