- Confronted by a chorus of allegations of appeasing Muslims, Rajiv Gandhi , in 1987, ordered the unlocking of the Babri Masjid. After all, the Congress wanted to show it is as much on the side of Hindu hardliners as it is of Muslim ones.- This kind of wishy-washy politics - along with the allegations over kickbacks in the Bofors gun deal - led to a resounding defeat for the Congress in 1989.- The Congress overturning the Shah Bano SC verdict did more, far more, damage to the fabric of India. It led in no small way to the Ram Janmabhoomi movement taking off. This movement was essentially a fight to corner the disputed area on which the Babri Masjid was built; Hindu hardliners believe their god Ram was born on this site and a temple had been demolished to make way for the masjid. The movement itself was launched in 1984 by the BJP and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), but it hadn't gained much traction until Rajiv unlocked the Babri Masjid. Then, it started to really bloom.- On December 6, 1992, 'kar sewaks' from the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and its affiliates, the Bajrang Dal, the BJP, of course, and the VHP, stormed the Babri Majid complex and destroyed the monument. They wanted to demolish the Masjid demolished build a temple there. This act triggered large-scale religious riots and, of course, the Mumbai blasts of 1993. India hasn't really recovered since.- Now, in December 2017, the BJP is firmly in power - note that in 1984, it only had two seats in the Lok Sabha - and commands a brute majority in the Lower House. It isn't a stretch to connect Shah Bano and its aftermath to the BJP's meteoric rise.- This brute majority in the Lok Sabha meant it could yesterday easily pass a bill in the Lower House criminalising Triple Talaq - an issue as contentious, if not more, as the Shah Bano alimony issue.-Where was the Congress yesterday? Many of its MPs was there, sure, but its heavy hitters weren't. Rajiv Gandhi's son Rahul, the newly-anointed president of the Congress, wasn't there either, for what was, by all accounts, a historic draft bill.-Did the Congress participate in the debate? Sure, but their performance gave the word 'lukewarm' a whole new meaning. An hour or so into the debate, news broke that the Congress would support the bill by and large, but would point out its deficiencies. What that meant in real terms was the Congress wouldn't do much at all to stop its passage or even engage in some spirited debate.-So, the Congress MPs made some noises, expressing unhappiness at the penal provisions of the bill, calling them too abrupt for a customary practice which was until recently legal. Yet, when some in the Opposition presented amendments to the draft bill, they hardly got any votes, which clearly means the Congress was part of votes that defeated the amendments.- This then was a sea change from the Congress under Rajiv Gandhi in 1986. Signs of this change were visible in Rajiv's son Rahul's public pronouncements, or the lack thereof, over the last five months. In August, Rahul welcomed the Supreme Court's quashing of 'instant triple talaq' and complimented the women "who fought for justice".- Then, in November, all through campaigning for the Gujarat elections, Rahul never raised the issue of the 2002 anti-Muslim religious riots in the state, rarely spoke about the demands of the Muslim community and didn't make any obligatory visits to Muslim shrines or similar places.-More telling was what Rahul 'did' do. He visited temples - a lot of temples. Congress circles read a larger political message in Rahul's actions - putting paid to BJP-RSS propaganda that the Congress is "anti-Hindu" and a "minority appeaser".- With its non-performance in the Triple Talaq Bill debate yesterday, the Congress has made it amply clear it has, at long last, learned its lesson from the catastrophe that was overturning the Shah Bano SC verdict.