India’s official name is Bharat, according to a brochure titled Bharat: The Mother of Democracy, which was distributed to G20 participants. Both the Constitution and the talks from 1946 to 1948 make reference to it. Leaders of the BJP support Bharat and claim that there is no issue with referring to the nation’s head of state as President of Bharat.
Source: ABP Desam: ABP News
The Constitution states in Article 1 that India, that is, Bharat, shall be a Union of States. For a very long period, the terms India and Bharat were used interchangeably without any apparent conflict or opposition. An iconic illustration is how their names are equally prominently displayed on different denominations of Indian coins.
Unfortunately, the government’s decision is perceived as a reflex response to the Opposition alliance’s ruse to call itself INDIA. The Modi administration would do well to refrain from being alarmed or irritated by the actions of a coalition of diverse opposition groups.
Source: India Today
The prolonged verbal conflict represents a poor reflection on a nation that is about to demonstrate its ability for global leadership at the G20 conference. The world’s fastest-growing major economy does not deserve the pointless name-calling. The nation, which declared its independence as a republic in 1950, has generally been at ease with its dual, multilingual identity that melds tradition and modernity.
Any effort to impose Bharat on Indian residents at the expense of India would be a step backward with unfavorable repercussions. Let there be room for both, as there has always been.
What do you think about this? Comment below.
