Why the Statue of Unity must not be the cause of disunity

We love to trivialise and dispute everything, which is why we are a criticism surplus society. For a democracy this isn’t necessarily a bad thing. But sometimes we take our disagreements or disagreeableness too far. As with the monument to Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel, inaugurated by PM Modi on October 31, which we can justifiably vaunt as the world’s tallest statue. But there is an irony to the largely uncalled for controversy over this tribute to the unifier of India. Should the Statue of Unity itself have become a topic for discord and disunity? Surely not.

Let us recall how Patel, at the helm of States Department, saved the day for India. From its formation in June 1947, the Department’s mandate was to negotiate soon-to-be-independent India’s relationship with the motley conglomeration of the over 555-odd Princely States that formed nearly half the area and over one-fourth the population of the sub-continent. To integrate them was a gargantuan task. The best tribute to Patel’s superb abilities and masterly control of the situation came from none other than his mentor, Mahatma Gandhi: “The problem of the states is so difficult that YOU alone can solve it.” Patel not only saved India from fragmentation, but incorporated even the smallest, weakest, or most reluctant territory into body politic of sovereign India. If the nation has at long last honoured him with the world’s tallest statue, isn’t this in the fitness of things?

The mammoth Statue of Unity stands 182 m. (nearly 600 ft) tall, overlooking the rolling hills and the sacred waters of the Narmada. Twice the height of the iconic Statue of Lady in the New York harbour, it has been meticulously designed by the 93-year old master sculptor Ram Sutar. It displaces the 128 m. (420 ft.) Spring Temple Buddha in Lushan, China, as the world’s tallest statue. Erected through a public-private initiative at the cost of nearly Rs 2,400 crore, the statue was announced by Modi in October 2013, when he was Chief Minister of Gujarat. 

He has now fulfilled his promise as India’s Prime Minister.  250 engineers and 3400 workers took over 42 months to turn the PM’s dream into a reality. The viewing gallery at 153 metres (500 ft) can take 200 visitors at a time, offering panoramic views of the Sardar Sarovar dam and the surrounding Satpura and Vindhyachal ranges. The museum, sound and light show, theme park, and shopping mall, hotels and tent cities are added attractions. At Rs. 350 per person per entrance, there is no doubt that the monument will attract millions of visitors.

So what if the statue cost a considerable amount of money? It is sure to generate tourist dollars and rupees, besides creating employment for thousands. In addition, it will be an inspiring public monument to the nation, something all of us can be proud of. Naysayers have in the past have similarly objected to our space programme, not to mention the bullet train. But they discount the monument’s symbolic value. As Modi said, “This statue is an answer to all those who question India’s power and might.” Washington D.C., the capital of the United States, also boasts of major monuments to the nation, which have now become an indispensable part of every visitor’s itinerary.

The protests by farmers and “tribals,” the latter specially marked out by our Left-Liberal media, are only to be expected, especially as they are likely to be politically motivated. Actually, all those displaced by the Statue have reportedly been generously compensated. Those who charge that the BJP doesn’t have “a past to invoke” are also surely mistaken. Patel doesn’t belong to any one political party, but the whole nation. Certainly, the Congress, marginalised and undermined his legacy can only rue their own miscalculation and meanness today, now that the BJP has stolen a march over them. Similarly, to complain that the BJP will gain politically by the Statue ahead of the 2019 general elections is also senseless. Why shouldn’t the ruling party benefit by this colossus that captures the public’s imagination and dominates the state’s political landscape? 

So what if the bronze cladding of the statue is made in China? Large portions of most of everything we use today is made in China. This is a reality regardless of patriotic sentiments. But, for the record, less than 10 per cent of the structure is actually imported from that country. Finally, the gleeful mud-raking over the Statue in the foreign press is only to be expected. Let us gloat instead on how every major newspaper in the world was forced to cover the event. That’s what happens when you make something that is the tallest, biggest, best—or first. We should aspire to do that more often.

Author is Director, IIAS, Shimla. Views are personal.