Terrorism has no religion has been the official tag line of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP); however, the Congress party had been the progenitor of Hindu/Saffron terrorism in files and speeches wherein it never existed in reality. This was the time when the Congress was in power both at the Centre and in several states, including the National Capital Delhi and Maharashtra. Those days are gone, and now the Congress has been in opposition for the past eleven years. Now, its spokespersons in debates are seen taunting the BJP government with remarks on Nathuram Godse, the killer of Mahatma Gandhi, as the first terrorist, giving more emphasis on the word first. Although Nathuram belonged to the Hindu Mahasabha, the BJP is a part of the Sangh Parivar. The relation between the Hindu Mahasabha and the Sangh Parivar is like the relation between the Republican Party and the Democrats in the United States.
Before getting into whether Nathuram was the first, second or last terrorist, let's define who is to be called a terrorist. There is no universal or standard definition of terrorism or a terrorist, and more harm to approach of defining it by intent, which says one's terrorist is another's freedom-fighter.
A terrorist is a person or a group of persons with a common identity, having the motive to instil terror in the hearts of the maximum population, wherein the identity of the population is different from the identity of the person or the organisation committing the act of terror. The population is largely innocent and has no relation to the deed for which the terrorist feels cause to punish, the fault being the identity for which the terrorist has hatred in his/her heart.
Accusing Nathuram of the act of terrorism is a nasty imagination of the Congress party. When Nathuram committed the crime of killing the Mahatma, there were hundreds of people present to assemble for the evening prayer. Ironically, this so-called terrorist did not try to kill any person other than the Mahatma, and instead, the crowd tried to lynch him. The act was not intended to instil terror in the hearts of the maximum population.
The identities of the Mahatma and Nathuram were not different, as both were proud Hindus. Therefore, punishing for belonging to an identity does not hold water in the case of Nathuram.
Interestingly, the kind of hatred in the heart of Nathuram for the Mahatma was such that he touched his feet before committing the crime. This is unique, not to be seen in the history of mankind, where the killer bows down before the victim.
The murder of Mahatma Gandhi was a political assassination, like many had been before and many will happen in the future. However, painting a political assassination as terrorism comes from the same mindset where the British used to call revolutionaries like Bhagat Singh and others, terrorists.
After Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination on January 30, 1948, violent reprisals by the Congress party workers erupted across Maharashtra, targeting the Chitpavan Brahmin community, to which Godse belonged. In cities like Pune, Satara, and Kolhapur, mobs allegedly led or supported by Congress workers burned thousands of homes, looted properties, and killed between 1,000 and 8,000 people. (Reference: https://mediascan.in/the-untold-horror-the-chitpavan-brahmin-massacre-of-1948/, https://www.firstpost.com/opinion/how-nehruvian-congress-manipulated-mahatma-gandhis-assassination-to-emasculate-hindu-nationalism-10961811.html, https://tfipost.com/2022/01/the-untold-story-of-the-massacre-of-5000-chitpavan-brahmins-by-congress-goons/)
The attacks were systematic: mobs knew Brahmin neighbourhoods, used Congress vehicles for transport, and faced little resistance from police or state authorities. Prominent Brahmin families, including Veer Savarkar’s, were targeted. Survivors described massacres, mass rapes, and entire villages destroyed.
Despite the scale of the violence, the massacre was suppressed in public memory. Indian media of the time barely reported it, while the government covered up official records, ensuring no perpetrators were punished. Historians and survivors later revealed the complicity of Congress leaders and the deliberate erasure of the tragedy.
The reader can judge whether the act of the Congress party at that time was a terrorist act or not, in the view of the definition given in the article above by the author.
Moreover, everyone knows what happened in 1984 after the assassination of then-Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. It was again the same story against Sikhs.
