The avalanche of letters (Nov. 7) that appeared in support of and against the views expressed in the article “Narendra Modi and why 2002 cannot go away” by N. Ram (Nov. 6) reinforces the extremely polarising nature of Mr. Modi. Whether such a leader will be able to hold together a country of huge size and immense diversities is extremely doubtful. Going through the responses, one is flabbergasted to note that those defending Mr. Modi do so by repeating the same specious arguments that Mr. Ram himself has listed and sequentially demolished in the most erudite article on the subject in recent times.

Shahabuddin Nadeem,


The article is an excellent analysis of contemporary politics. The nation is in dire need of an alternative to the Congress-led UPA. But it is in a dilemma over choosing a new leader. Many voters are neither prepared to accept Mr. Modi as a known devil nor reject him as an unknown angel. But the article is a timely reminder which reflects the nation’s conscience.

M. Xavier,


I agree that the sangh parivar’s right-wing agenda is far too obvious. I agree the pogrom and its repercussions were horrible. Agreed, those smitten by Mr. Modi, especially the youth, need to know about his alleged role in the riots. But don’t they also need to know that there have been no riots in Gujarat in the last decade?

Sidharth K. Varma,


Many voters are unlikely to support the BJP. But his “unenviable international status” will not in the least deter them from endorsing him. If Mr. Modi does become the Prime Minister, the self-righteous West will continue to do business with him as usual, as India is a strong country, warts and all.

I.S. Kanthimathinathan,



Narendra Modi and why 2002 cannot go awayNovember 6, 2013

More In: Letters | Opinion