Paranormal Activities: Paranormal Activities may be no more in a couple w...

Paranormal Activities: Paranormal Activities may be no more in a couple w...: It's been a long time since I've regularly posted here on Paranormal Activities, the main reasons for this is I lost the passion and...

A Blessing : Human Face

A Blessing : Human Face: The face of a man often deceive Hurt, imposture, elide form his breed Skipping the truth, make him proud Poor is treated with...

If you're negotiating to buy something--a house, a company, even as the purchasing agent for a big company--you're also selling. That's because it isn't a faceless transaction involving a list price and a credit card. The purchase involves faith and trust and risk and someone caring enough about the other person to do more than seek the highest possible/lowest possible price. If you hope to buy for less than the clearing price, or get better work than average, in fact, you are selling when you're buying. A friend was selling his house, and every time he showed one particular prospective buyer a new feature, the buyer discounted it, demeaning its value. This is a common strategy--denigrate the thing you are hoping to buy, question the judgment of the seller, make them feel desperate. After all, the thinking goes, a desperate person will sell for less. Perhaps. But more often, a person being made to feel desperate will take her valuable goods somewhere else, to someone who cares more. Why not say, "that's fabulous! It makes the house worth even more, well done." Recognizing the good work of those you hope to buy from puts you on precisely the same side of the table as the seller. The brutal purchasing manager who uses RFPs like a club and nickels and dimes (not to mention dollars) suppliers--do you think he's actually getting their best work? When we're talking about emotional labor, it's not often about the money, it's about how the transaction makes the seller feel. Or consider the used car dealer. His business is only as good as his inventory, of course. So where to get the cars that get sold? One strategy is to only buy cars from desperate folks, folks with no options. (Or to make the people you meet with feel desperate). What sort of inventory does that leave you with? Last resort cars from people with no options. When the dealer who sold me a car recently tried this tactic with the car I hope to sell, I walked away. The good stuff is more likely to be sold to people who care. The things you'd like to buy are probably going to be sold by people who have other options now. Posted by Seth Godin on October 09, 2013 | Permalink | TrackBack (0) inShare 559 Your hall of fame Baseball, sure, but also roller derby and other worthy endeavors have a Hall of Fame. It says a lot about an industry when it cares enough about its work (and the people doing it) to go to the trouble of organizing this story. The music industry is particularly good at this--not only do they have a hall of fame, but they have gold records, Grammy awards and multiple ways to highlight and honor people doing the work. Why doesn't your company have one? A wall honoring the driver who broke a stupid company policy and got the shipment there on time... A diorama highlighting a particularly generous middle manager who always managed to find the resources to make something happen... A little glass box holding the purchase order that an heroic salesperson brought back from her long trip... I got a note a few weeks ago, letting me know I was being inducted into the Direct Marketing Hall of Fame. 101 people --Eddie Bauer, Lillian Vernon and of course, LL Bean--are there (real people, all of them). And also my friend Lester Wunderman, who pioneered the very idea of Direct Marketing and helped launch the American Express card. Three of us are joining this year--Don Peppers and Martha Rogers are the real highlights (if you haven't read their books, you should). Their first book (1996) completely upended my view of the world. The thing about direct marketing is that it's always been a bootstrapped industry. Lillian famously started at her kitchen table, a few blocks from where I was born (she took her last name from "Mt. Vernon"). Buy some stamps, do some tests, repeat. That approach, the leverage that comes from having big-time media for low-budget money, is here for all of us. We are all direct marketers now. That means you don't need a permit or permission to start your Hall or your walk of fame. The web makes it easier than ever to have a virtual institution, one that exists solely to find and highlight people that might be worth highlighting. You should start one. Even better, in a world where we can chart our own course, you could figure out a path that gets you in to the Hall you care about. Not tomorrow perhaps, but, drip by drip, over a career. Posted by Seth Godin on October 08, 2013 | Permalink | TrackBack (0) inShare 454 The easiest way to disagree with someone ...is to assume that they are uninformed, and that once they know what you know, they will change their mind. (A marketing problem!) The second easiest way to disagree is to assume that the other person is a dolt, a loon, a misguided zealot who refuses to see the truth. Their selfish desire to win interferes with their understanding of reality. (A political problem!) The third easiest way to disagree with someone is to not actually hear what they are saying. (A filtering problem!) The hardest way to disagree with someone is to come to understand that they see the world differently than we do, to acknowledge that they have a different worldview, something baked in long before they ever encountered this situation. (Another marketing problem, the biggest one). There actually are countless uninformed people. There are certainly craven zealots. And yes, in fact, we usually hear what we want to hear, or hear what the TV tells us, or hear what we expect, instead of hearing what was said, and the intent behind it. Odds are, though, that we will make the change we seek by embracing the hard work of telling stories that resonate, as opposed to dismissing the other who appears not to get it. Posted by Seth Godin on October 08, 2013 | Permalink | TrackBack (0) inShare 699 The Show Me State (of the art) I could ask you to bear with me through this urgent and important post, but I'm not optimistic that many people will. The punchline matters more than it ever has before. "Show me what this is about before I commit to it." And the follow up: "Now that I know what it's about, I don't need to commit." It started with the coming attractions for upcoming movies. By packing more and more of the punchline into the TV commercial or the theater preview, producers felt like they were satisfying the needs of the audience to know what they were going to see before they bought their ticket. Instead, they trained us to be satisfied by merely watching the attractions. No need to see the movie, you've already seen the best part. SportsCenter piled on by showing fans a supercut of every great or heroic play of the weekend--a sports fix without investing the time or living through the drama of the game itself. Record albums used to require not only listening to the entire side (no fast forward on an LP) but actually getting up and flipping it over. The radio wasn't going to play anything but the A side of the single, so if you liked an artist, you surrendered yourself to 45 minutes of her journey, the way she had it in mind. A performance artist was on the local public radio station the other day. He didn't want to talk about the specifics of his show, because giving away the tactics was clearly going to lessen the impact of his work. No matter. The host revealed one surprise after another, outlining the entire show, because, after all, that's his job--to tell us what we're going to see so we don't have to see it ourselves. We don't want to organize the course or go to the lecture or read the book until we know precisely what it's going to be about. College wasn't like this. You committed to four years, you moved somewhere, and then you saw the curriculum. That's part of why it works. A huge part. We hesitate to surrender our commitment so easily today. It's easier to read the 140 character summary or see the highlights or read the live blog, so we can check the box and then move on. But move on to where? To another box to be checked? We become like the tester in the ice cream factory, surrounded by thousands of flavors, but savoring none of them. We each have a fixed amount of time. One thing you can do is invest it in knowing the summary of what 23 people said. The other thing you can do is to commit to living and breathing and learning from one of those people. Perhaps you will get more by being exposed more deeply to fewer. One reason an audiobook can change your life is that you can't skip ahead. And the other reason is that you might listen to it five or six times, at the pace of the reader, not at your pace. My full-day live seminars have impact on people partly because I don't announce the specific agenda or the talking points in advance. It's live and it's alive. I have no certainty what's about to happen, and neither do the others in the room. A morphing, changing commitment by all involved, one that grows over time. Yes, I get that there's never again going to be a need to buy an album or to listen to all the songs in order, that you can get the quick summary of any book you're expected to have read, that your time is so valuable that perhaps the only economic choice is to live a Cliffs Notes version of your life. [Oh, that's right, Cliffs Notes' sales are way down because they're too long.] In fact, you could do that, but when you do, you've surrendered to efficiency and lost some life, some surprise and a lot of growth. Posted by Seth Godin on October 07, 2013 | Permalink | TrackBack (0) inShare 547 Looking a gift card in the mouth "You qualified." I'd just purchased $102 worth of stuff at the sporting goods store, and the clerk happily handed me my ten dollar gift card. What a nice surprise. I turned around to the stuff next to the checkout, searching for a $6 item I could now purchase, for free. "Oh, sorry, you can't use it today. It becomes valid tomorrow." Not only that, but I noted that it expires in four months. Not so much of a gift. A manipulation. I better hurry back, the thinking goes, or that thing of value in my wallet will disappear. Just as insightful is the recent promotion that they did at Staples. Pay $15 to buy the ability to save 10% on most things in the store (not online) for the next sixty days. It turns out that most people spend about $50 on a visit, which means that part of the card pays for itself in that first visit. But, and it's a big but, you've now purchased something that feels like a debt, one that you can only profit from if you head back, and soon. These, of course, are not gift cards at all. They are motivational cards. And they work. People are not machines, and purchasing just about anything is as much about emotion and the story we tell ourselves as it is about economic calculation. Charging you for the chance to save money one day is one more step in a dance about feelings. Posted by Seth Godin on October 06, 2013 | Permalink | TrackBack (0) inShare 527 Understanding marginal cost How much does it cost Wikipedia to have one more person read an article? How much does it cost Chanel to produce one more bottle of perfume? How about one more digital copy of a Grateful Dead concert? The cost of the next item produced is called 'marginal cost'. It doesn't include set-up fees, rent, years of training, insurance or all the other huge costs an organization might pay. It's merely the cost of one more unit. In a competitive, undifferentiated market, the price will generally be lowered by competitors until it is just above marginal cost. Think about that... If it costs a dollar to make something, and your competitor is selling for $1.10, then in an efficient market, you have every incentive to sell your item for a penny less than that. It's better than not selling it. There are many implications of this, the first being the explanation of why so much stuff online is free. Free is a magical concept, the place where trial and virality live. If the marginal cost of a new user is virtually zero (and in an ad supported business, a new user is actually profitable, not a cost) then it's no surprise that it's hard to charge for your app when there are other apps that do precisely what yours does. Big, established companies have traditionally had a difficult time understanding this concept. The market for ebooks, for example, ended up in Federal court because otherwise smart people in book publishing couldn't get their arms around the idea that their marginal cost of an ebook delivered by Amazon was precisely zero. No paper, no shipping, no ink. Their response was to talk about all of their fixed costs (which are real, and which are important). Things like typesetting and advances and editing and promotion... But none of those things are marginal costs. That means that someone entering the market, someone with nothing to lose, is happy to wipe out as many fixed costs as he can and then price as close to zero as he can get away with. It's not nice nor does it feel fair, but it's true and it works. The only defense against this race to marginal cost is to have a product that is differentiated, that has no substitute, that is worth asking for by name. If your product has a low marginal cost and a traditionally high price, particularly if it's one of a kind in its market, then you're in a great position to benefit from sampling. Which is why vodka companies are happy to sponsor parties and why cell phone companies will do almost anything to get you in the door. Until you understand the true marginal cost of your products or services, you can't make smart decisions about pricing or customer acquisition. Industries with zero marginal-cost products and services are inherently unstable until someone figures out how to become the king of the hill, the leader, the one worth picking because everyone else is. When that happens, the truth above about efficient markets goes away... because a market with one dominant leader isn't efficient any more. Posted by Seth Godin on October 05, 2013 | Permalink | TrackBack (0) inShare 677

HomeFieldAdvantage: Golf today

HomeFieldAdvantage: Golf today: Played golf today at Mercer Oaks East course. Very nice course and I had a good outing. Scored pretty well even with my hybrid baseball/golf...

Post navigation← Older posts
Media’s response to Pak Envoy! Oct
9
      1 Vote

During a press interview to a foreign journalist President Pranab Mukherjee said that even if cross border terrorism was perpetrated by non-state actors as Islamabad claimed, the Pakistan government could not evade responsibility. The territory was under the jurisdiction of the government, the President pointed out. “Non-state actors do not descend from heaven,

” he said. This view was echoed by Information and Broadcasting (I&B) Minister Mr. Manish Tewari who told media that the crossing over by terrorists and non-state actors suggested either complicity or negligence by the Pakistan government. “Obviously these terrorists or non-state actors are not coming out of a vacuum,”

he said.

The Pakistan High Commissioner to India Mr. Salman Bashir gave a veiled rejoinder to these remarks. But he focused his criticism mainly against the media. He accused the media of focusing exclusively on “so-called” incursions and infiltrations from across the border.

He said:

“Whoever is making the argument that they have not descended from heaven, I want to ask who are these thousands of people who are involved in heinous acts of terrorism in Pakistan . Have they descended from heaven? We agree they have not descended from heaven, from where are they being funded and sourced?”

One can appreciate the constraints under which Pakistan ’s official envoy to India has to function. Mr. Bashir said something, and he implied something. Both his assertion and implication deserve attention. Since he thought it fit to direct his ire against the Indian media this writer takes the liberty of directly responding to his criticism.

Mr. Bashir cannot blame the Indian media of responding to continued incursions from across the border which for diplomatic compulsions he described as “so-called”. But he was right to point out the failure of the Indian government as well as the media to adequately differentiate between the government and non-state actors in Pakistan . Mr. Bashir has rightly asserted that “thousands of terrorists” are operating against Pakistan who obviously did not descend from heaven. By implication this is tacit admission of failure of the Pakistan government. It is a fact that there are substantially more victims of terrorism in Pakistan than in India including in the state of J&K. Then Mr. Bashir went on to question the source of funding and training of these terrorists. His central plea was for the enhancement of cooperation between Islamabad and New Delhi.

He said:

“We have evidence which we have shared and are prepared to share with the rest of the world and particularly with the government of India on fuelling of acts of terrorism in Pakistan .”

Mr. Bashir’s plea for greater cooperation between India and Pakistan to fight terror clearly indicates that by questioning the source of terror funding he was not pointing a finger at India . He was obviously indicating the hand of Al Qaeda which inspires global terrorism. In the light of the reality of terrorist activity in Pakistan funded and directed by global forces the Indian government is clearly remiss in not taking an initiative for closer cooperation with Pakistan to combat terror. New Delhi ’s inhibition may be explained by its continued doubts about how deeply subverted Pakistan ’s security establishment is by pro-terror elements. Well, the Indian media has no such inhibitions. Since Mr. Bashir squarely blamed the Indian media I take the liberty of directly addressing him. I put a question to the Pakistan government through him that the Indian government has failed to do.

Mr. Bashir you seek closer cooperation between India and Pakistan , you admit that there are thousands of terrorists operating inside Pakistan . You indicate that they are funded and directed from abroad. You tacitly imply though you do not state that they cannot operate without help from a section of the official machinery. I agree with your overall analysis. My question is: Will the Pakistan government accept an offer of joint intelligence and joint operations against terror to wipe out these non-state actors from both our countries?

I know that you may not deign to respond to such a question from a mere media person instead of from the government. But let me assure you. If you do answer the media will compel the Indian government to respond appropriately.

So will you respond?

Share this:


Leave a comment
Posted in Nation
The President’s curious priorities! Oct
8
      1 Vote

After the media pointed out that the credit for the rollback of the Ordinance on convicted MPs went to President Pranab Mukherjee and not to Congress Vice-President Rahul Gandhi who exploited the President’s known reluctance to sign it, Mr. LK Advani praised the President for his decision. However, the President reacted to this praise most curiously. The President with uncalled for modesty went out of his way to dissociate himself from the decision to roll back the Ordinance. It is known that he sat over the Ordinance and was reluctant to sign it. By signing it he could have possibly attracted strictures from the Supreme Court to make his position untenable. Understandably he mulled over the matter and shared his views with UPA Ministers who called on him to discuss the Ordinance. It was after that when Mr. Rahul Gandhi jumped into the controversy to corner credit. Mr. Advani’s praise for the President therefore was a routine and unexceptionable observation.

However the President reacted to the media in response to such praise by saying:

“I cannot comment on what the Opposition has said about my role. My duties are now completely determined by the Indian Constitution.”

The praise for the President was precisely because he did follow the Constitution by not immediately signing the Ordinance. Why, then, his curiously defensive rejoinder? Eyebrows were further raised after the President’s son, Mr. Abhijeet Mukherjee, called on the chief victim of the scrapped Ordinance, Mr. Lalu Prasad Yadav, who was in jail. The popular conclusion derived from this visit was that Mr. Mukherjee had gone there to convince Mr. Yadav that the decision not to sign the Ordinance reflected no personal motive of the President but was dictated by the Constitution. This was unnecessary. Mr. Yadav one is sure is sufficiently knowledgeable to have been aware of that. If such speculation has any basis it is certainly odd that the President should be so concerned about Mr. Yadav’s feelings. The President after all is above party politics.

Alas, it does not seem that the President is as much above party politics as he should be. His continued silence over the horrendous events in Andhra is equally mystifying. After the Union government hastily declared the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh by ceding the new state of Telangana despite the state assembly being overwhelmingly opposed to the measure, the entire state is in flames. Apart from mammoth public protest and indefinite fasts launched by politicians, the whole state is without electric power because of a strike by workers. And this situation has been growing and worsening for days. Has not the Constitutional machinery in the state collapsed to necessitate the application of Article 356 to impose President’s rule in Andhra to restore order? But the Prime Minister and the Union cabinet are mute.

Surprisingly, even the President is silent. Article 78 (b) of the Constitution states: “It shall be the duty of the Prime Minister to furnish such information relating to the administration of the affairs of the Union and proposals for legislation as the President may call for.” Should not the President invoke this Article and initiate action? Surely the millions of agitated people in Andhra Pradesh deserve as much attention as Mr. Lalu Yadav should get?

Share this:


Leave a comment
Posted in Nation
Snooping, security and privacy! Oct
5
      1 Vote

After Julian Assange and the Wikileaks controversy it is the Edgar Snowden affair that has rocked the world. Snowden was a government contractor working at the National Security Agency (NSA) in America. The NSA in order to protect the US snoops on citizens in America and abroad looking for terrorist connections. The NSA collects and analyses foreign communication and foreign signals of intelligence in order to protect the US. In an interview in Hong Kong Snowden leaked top-secret government surveillance programs that led to an international debate over national security versus individual privacy. In a recent statement to the European Parliament Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Snowden said:

“A culture of secrecy has denied our societies the opportunity to determine the appropriate balance between the human right of privacy and the governmental interest in investigation.”

Among Snowden’s leaks was information about secret US surveillance of foreign governments including Brazil and India. The Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff in protest lashed out at the US in the UN General Assembly and canceled her official visit to Washington. Critics in India not only criticized the US but berated the Indian government after disclosures that it had also like America and China snooped on citizens.

Whatever the extent of public outrage over official snooping, it will not and cannot stop. The world needs a reality check. As long as terrorism survives in the world and weapons of mass destruction can be manufactured by private citizens in a garage, surveillance is a survival imperative for governments. What is required is that such surveillance by all governments be monitored and controlled by the UN.

Technology has not only enabled private citizens to manufacture weapons of mass destruction, but also to snoop on governments and citizens alike. In the foreseeable future therefore privacy cannot be guaranteed for any citizen or government. In the event is it not prudent for people to adjust to the new reality? In other words technology will render total transparency for governments and private citizens unavoidable. It will signify a game changing new culture for mankind. Should not people therefore start adjusting to this change and make their lives totally transparent? It may lead to a happier and safer world.

Indeed, there could well be advantages in being snooped upon! While many people criticize the government’s snooping policy, so do I but for different reasons. My complaint is that the government does not bug my telephone, hack my computer or bug my regular haunts where I have coffee sessions with friends. I want to be heard but nobody listens. Does the government think that it is only the rich and the powerful that can provide useful information?

So can ordinary people like this writer. The government should bug ordinary people too in order to create a level playing field. Not only Neera Radia and Amar Singh are worth snooping on. People like me too have valuable ideas that would help the government. Alas! All my ideas and the pearls of wisdom exchanged with friends go waste because the government does not snoop on me. If the government were to do so would not some of that wisdom penetrate the dense minds of our rulers to improve governance and conditions in our nation?

Share this:


Leave a comment
Posted in Nation
Politics of convicted MPs! Oct
3
      1 Vote

The current controversy over the Supreme Court (SC) judgment and the government’s Ordinance on the continuance of convicted MPs in legislatures needs to be appreciated in its proper perspective. Right now corruption is a very emotive issue. The public not surprisingly has jumped to the conclusion that the Ordinance which sought to overrule the SC judgment was part of political chicanery. But to what extent does the SC judgment or for that matter the Ordinance actually affect the prevalence of corruption in the system? Is everybody in the government, parliament and judiciary missing the wood for the trees?



The existing Representation of Peoples (RP) Act was challenged by two writ petitions filed by advocate Lily Thomas and Lok Prahari, through its General Secretary S. N. Shukla. The petitioners questioned the legality of MPs continuing in parliament despite conviction by obtaining a stay order and further hearing from a higher court. The SC considered the RP Act unconstitutional and ruled that immediately after conviction the MP with a sentence of two or more years.must be disqualified. The Union cabinet drafted an ordinance to neutralize the Supreme Court’s order mandating immediate disqualification. The government held that if the conviction was stayed by the higher court within 90 days the elected representative should not be disqualified. But the government in its ordinance denied the convicted MP perks and voting rights till being cleared by a higher court. Only, the MP’s seat would remain occupied and there would be no by-election.

Recognizing ground realities the government considered the ease with which motivated and fraudulent prosecution and conviction could be secured from lower courts to harm even innocent politicians. Law Minister Kapil Sibal said that “everybody knows the judicial system has miserably failed to save itself from corruption charges and nepotism”. Even though the Ordinance remedy may be flawed the truth of judicial corruption cannot be denied and has indeed been voiced by Supreme Court judges and reputed jurists.

The media has gone to town attributing Rahul Gandhi’s outburst against the Ordinance as the trigger to clean up the system and check corruption and criminalization. The reality is of course that it was the President’s doubts about the legality of the Ordinance conveyed to cabinet ministers that was seized by the Congress party to enact Rahul Gandhi’s drama in order to obtain credit. The entire issue is being projected by the media and perhaps being swallowed by the public as a great fight against corruption launched by the Congress inspired by Rahul Gandhi. This is laughable. The politicians, the judiciary and the media are living in world of make believe. Consider the reality.

Two MPs, Lalu Yadav and Rashid Masood have been unseated in parliament after being convicted in corruption cases. Their corruption was committed decades ago. Lalu Yadav has been convicted after 17 years and Masood has been convicted after 23 years of their misdemeanors. Even if neither was a sitting MP both would have enjoyed three of four terms of being in parliament before this recent conviction. What kind of fight against corruption and cleansing of parliament is that? Currently there would be a dozen leading MPs involved in corruption during the Commonwealth Games and other mega scams under investigation and facing court proceedings. Will they be unseated after remaining in parliament for the next several terms and being convicted after a few decades?

The prime need is to make mandatory the completion of all court cases within six months so that speedy justice can punish the guilty. That calls for serious judicial reform. Instead of addressing that the obsession with legal nitpicking related to the RP Act through Supreme Court rulings and government Ordinances is meaningless and irrelevant. It is designed only to deceive the public into believing that corruption is genuinely being fought.

Share this:


Leave a comment
Posted in Nation
PM’s US trip succeeds despite sabotage! Oct
1
      1 Vote

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to America has been as successful as could be reasonably expected. It was a crucial trip during which the PM met President Obama, Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and heads of other SAARC nations. In his meeting with President Obama a game changing breakthrough was achieved not sufficiently appreciated by analysts. America and India have agreed to become closest partners for defence cooperation. For transfer of defence technology India ’s relations with the US are now at par with Britain.



This is what Pandit Nehru sought from President Kennedy after the Sino-Indian conflict of 1962 when the latter’s death aborted the effort. This is what President Bush sought when he signed the nuclear deal but that effort failed because the Indian government scared of domestic criticism failed to deliver. Now agreement has been reached. The first sign of change is evident from India ’s consent to participate in joint naval exercises in the world’s largest maritime exercise involving dozens of countries. China is not invited to the exercise and the People’s Liberation Army has expressed strong opposition to it. Regardless of the PM’s future the Indo-US deal has been signed. It is likely to endure because it is not between political parties but between governments.

The PM’s meeting with his Pakistani counterpart was as crucial. Though no breakthrough was achieved or attempted the ice was broken. Contrary to the expectations of sceptics the PM addressed India ’s immediate concerns about border violations and terror camps. Mr. Sharif did acknowledge those concerns and promised action to stabilize the border. After he delivers some results the PMs will meet to carry the dialogue further. Already undated invitations for such meeting have been extended. If the PM achieved a big step forward towards the US , he also managed a baby half-step towards Pakistan . Now it remains to be seen how the agreements of this visit actually translate into results.

Anyone following the run-up to the Prime Minister’s visit would marvel at the number of glitches that suddenly erupted to mar its prospects. And for each manufactured event to scuttle progress in the talks the media played its part by a hysterical negative approach to the visit. The opposition parties by their strident criticism of the PM while he was abroad, throwing all accepted diplomatic norms to the winds, also played its part. It is a well established norm that opposition parties do not attack a head of state when he is abroad or when opposition leaders themselves are abroad. This is what democratic bipartisan approach to foreign policy denotes. But the BJP launched a shrill attack against the PM demanding an explanation while he was in the US.

The rot started with Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi. He enacted a preplanned unprecedented theatrical performance to rubbish the PM just hours before he was scheduled to meet President Obama. This demeaned the PM in the eyes of the opposition and demands for his resignation were voiced. It is a reflection of our sick state of politics that even the PM’s former press Advisor Mr. Sanjay Baru was swept along the popular current to advise the PM to resign. It is amazing that not a single voice within or outside the Congress party has made the obvious democratic demand. After the intemperate, ill-timed and irresponsible statement by the ruling party’s vice-president to damage prospects of international negotiations, it is Rahul Gandhi who should be sacked from his post if he does not voluntarily resign.

Why should the PM be asked to quit?

Narendra Modi in a public rally in Delhi lashed out at Gandhi. But he was equally amiss himself. In his speech he sought to damage the PM’s foreign visit by uttering two falsehoods. The first was that the PM had allegedly lamented to Obama that India was a very poor nation in need of help. From where did Modi get his information?

From all accounts the PM discussed terrorism and not India ’s poverty. The second falsehood was even more intriguing. Based upon a TV quote by a noted Pakistani journalist Modi attempted to further muddy the atmosphere just hours before the PM and Nawaz Sharif were to meet. He quoted Pakistani anchor of Geo TV, Hamid Mir, who alleged on TV that Nawaz Sharif had described the PM as a “village woman” pleading before the US President. This was supposed to be said over a breakfast interview given by Sharif to two other journalists and Mir. The two other journalists, Barkha Dutt and a Pakistani journalist Absar Alam, both denied Mir’s version. It seemed that Sharif said that concerns against Pakistan could be addressed directly to Islamabad instead of to Washington.

This was in line with India ’s consistent stand contrary to Pakistan ’s earlier approach that Indo-Pak ties should be bilateral without third party intervention. After Barkha Dutt and Absar Alam rubbished Mir’s claims the latter confessed that Sharif made no criticism of the PM. He lamely tried to explain away his contradicted version by saying that Sharif spoke in jest. But why did not Mir say this in his original comment on TV? In that remark he even indicated that Sharif considered Manmohan Singh weak and was looking forward to doing business with his successor after 2014.

One will not speculate whether all this happened by coincidence or by design, and if by design, the inspiration of these incidents. Hamid Mir is a powerful and influential TV journalist in Pakistan. Currently there are differences between the Pakistan army and the civil government over how to tackle the Taliban. Nawaz Sharif is seeking a dialogue. The army wants to continue with the status quo by “fighting” the Taliban. Mir sympathized with the army by stating:

“It’s a very complicated situation. The army does not seem to be in the mood for talks as it has gained a lot of ground against the Taliban in the recent past.”

Mir should know. He has after all excellent contacts. He was in fact the last journalist to interview slain Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin laden in Afghanistan in 2002. It is difficult to believe that he could have accomplished this without the clearance, if not cooperation, of the ISI.

In summation, Rahul Gandhi, Narendra Modi and Hamid Mir all passed comments that could have damaged the PM’s US visit. Large sections of big business electronic media and the opposition joined them. Modi and Gandhi are repeatedly projected by the media as the two contenders for becoming prime minister. It is ironic that both contenders are on the same side insofar as the PM’s negotiations in the US were concerned. It is also intriguing that these three fed on each other’s narrative to rubbish the PM. But then, this does not necessarily suggest collusion. It could be pure coincidence. As for big business that funds both media and politics it may matter little which contender becomes PM. Heads I win, tails you lose!

For big business Modi and Gandhi might well be two sides of the same coin. But beyond business interests of the corporate sector there are also powerful international forces interested in damaging relations between India and the US , as well as between India and Pakistan . Now which international forces would be pleased if Indo-US and Indo-Pak elations deteriorated? It is for readers to ponder and arrive at their own conclusions.

Image (c) ibnlive.in.com

Share this:


Leave a comment
Posted in Nation
The great Congress mystery! Sep
30
      4 Votes

There is a mystery related to the functioning of the Congress party that nobody I have asked has been able to clear. The latest episode heightens the mystery. The Union cabinet along with the core group of the Congress party in the presence and with the consent of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi approved the draft of the Ordinance to protect criminal MPs. After the Ordinance was presented to the President he expressed doubts about its legality and delayed signing it. Meanwhile the opposition mounted a blistering attack against the Ordinance. Cabinet ministers and Congress party leaders stoutly defended the Ordinance and accused the opposition of being complicit in the decision to draft the Bill protecting criminal MPs.



Then Congress Vice President Mr. Rahul Gandhi without notice intervened in a Congress press conference and condemned the Ordinance in very strong and intemperate language. He did this while the PM was abroad about to hold very crucial meetings with several heads of states. The timing of Mr. Gandhi’s remarks was so significant that had he not been a leader of such limited understanding one might have concluded that he was representing a hostile foreign power seeking to damage India ’s foreign policy.

After Mr. Gandhi spoke the cabinet ministers and Congress party leaders instead of criticizing his performance somersaulted and fell in line making nonsense of their own earlier publicly stated remarks. This writer has never in his long career seen such a craven display of sycophancy and lack of self respect and honour as long as can be remembered.

Here then is the mystery. What is the secret of Mrs. Gandhi’s hold on all members of the Congress party? She cannot get votes. Her party is performing badly even in her own constituency despite campaigning by her and her family members. She has been accused by credible international sources of receiving illegal funds from foreign sources. She has been accused by credible international sources of having a secret illegal foreign bank account. She has never taken the trouble to deny charges. She has not displayed any significant expertise related to economic, foreign or political policy. Her son, Mr. Rahul Gandhi, is even less accomplished than her. There are serious and credible allegations of his having been detained in the US possessing unaccounted money and drugs and subsequently being released through intervention of the Indian government.

Despite all this, Congress party members from top to bottom behave like craven slaves of mother and son. One cannot fathom the reason for this. One would like to be enlightened. In conclusion this writer would like to clarify that he is not critical mainly of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi or Mr. Rahul Gandhi. They look after their interests as all people are expected to. It is the members of the Congress party that attract the strongest possible criticism. So obnoxious and counter productive is their conduct that it strengthens this writer’s belief that the Congress party must be buried in order to preserve Indian democracy.

Share this:


5 Comments
Posted in Nation
Kashmir exposures Convert crisis into opportunity! Sep
27
      1 Vote

Government should not overspend effort to undo the political damage inflicted by the recent leaked allegations by the Ministry of Defence and General VK Singh. The damage to India’s case in Kashmir cannot be undone. Just days after the recent disclosure terrorists have struck in Jammu to kill army and police personnel. More attacks should be expected by terrorists emboldened by the disclosures vindicating their allegations. Politics is about perception of facts and not about facts themselves. The recent disclosures have confirmed in the public mind all the perceived truths about India’s relationship with Kashmir repeatedly articulated by separatists and many other foreign powers. The government should instead seize the moment to convert a setback into opportunity and settle once and for all the Kashmir dispute that has bedeviled the subcontinent’s peace since Independence.

However, in order to attempt that the government must be honest enough to confront the truth and bold enough to dare an initiative.

What is the truth?

One need no iterate the oft repeated facts relating to the Kashmir dispute. Kashmir is not the problem but the symptom of the problem. The problem is the Partition. Kashmir was a state with contiguous borders with both India and Pakistan. The Hindu ruler of this Muslim majority state wanted independence and good relations with both nations. The attack by Pakistani raiders backed by its army to forcibly seize Kashmir forced the ruler’s hands. He acceded to India in order to obtain the Indian army’s help to repulse the enemy.

As Kashmir Chief Minister Mr. Omar Abdullah pointed out recently, Kashmir unlike other princely states of the Indian Union did not merge with India but stopped short after accession. That is why it has a special status and Article 370. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru at the time of accepting Kashmir’s instrument of accession stated that it was “subject to the will of the people of Kashmir”. This was followed by India’s acceptance of the UN Resolution regarding Plebiscite in Kashmir. For over six decades stupid policies pursued by the governments of India and Pakistan, both acting like foreign pawns, has denied the region peace and stability. The distorted approach of both governments that have behaved like Raja Jaichand and Mir Jafar to ally with foreigners against their own flesh and blood has its roots in the Partition.

Britain offered the opportunity to keep India united by presenting the Cabinet Mission Plan that would have created a federation. Jinnah accepted the proposal. Nehru rejected it because the Plan allowed the Muslim dominated units to secede after 10 years if they so wished. Like pathetic colonial minions the leaders of India and Pakistan accepted Independence and Partition without the borders of the new nations determined. Immediately after Independence, accompanied by Partition, riots engineered by interested foreign powers to perpetuate the division cost a million lives within a few months. Similarly the engineered Kashmir dispute led to the partition of the state in order to create a permanent bone of contention that would prevent reunification.

Nehru, who had rejected the Cabinet Mission Plan and a confederation when these were offered, attempted before his death to undo the spirit of the Partition by creating an Indo-Pakistan confederation. In 1959 President Ayub Khan offered joint defence that would have automatically led to a confederation. But the same President Ayub Khan rejected Nehru’s proposal of a confederation presented by Sheikh Abdullah which Jinnah had accepted at the time of the Cabinet Mission Plan. In other words, both India and Pakistan had wanted confederation. But they had wanted it at different times. Therefore they cannot agree. Is this not shocking diplomacy? The absence of statesmanship displayed by leaders of both governments and their readiness to serve foreign interests could not be more glaring.

The latest revelations by the Indian government and General VK Singh have made prospects of reconciliation ever more remote. Peace will come only if the leaders of India and Pakistan are bold enough to cut the Gordian knot and make a dramatic breakthrough. Critics have opposed the proposed meeting between the Prime Ministers of India and Pakistan scheduled for September 29 in New York. BJP leader and former foreign minister Mr. Yashwant Sinha has stated that such a meeting is premature as long as terrorism continues. He suggested that lower officials should first meet. One begs to differ. Even if lower officials meet and people to people contacts continue for a hundred years there will be no progress.

The problem is the trust deficit. That exists between governments and not between peoples. That exists because the armies of both nations are in contention. Only joint defence and operations to wipe out terrorism from the region will remove the trust deficit. There are more victims of terrorism in Pakistan than in India. Prime Minister Mr. Manmohan Singh should bluntly tell Mr. Nawaz Sharif on September 29 that enough is enough. Unless the armies of both nations cooperate there cannot be peace and stability in the region. If even now, when both nations are besieged by terrorism and instability, their governments cannot act rationally, they never will. Without joint defence the trust deficit cannot be removed. If there is joint defence it must inevitably lead to some form of confederation. Both leaders should read the writing on the wall. They should forget what their critics might say today. They should focus on what historians will say tomorrow.

Share this:


Leave a comment
Posted in Nation
Politicians, Army, playing with fire! Sep
25
      1 Vote

General VK Singh reportedly has decided to file an application with the Right to Information (RTI) commission seeking a copy of General Vinod Bhatia’s secret report on the alleged misuse of the top secret Technical Support Division (TSD) during his tenure as Army Chief. Will the government respond by releasing the secret report? After news of the report appeared in the media the government stated that the report “impinges on matters of national security and, as such, the government will take a decision and further actions after careful examination.” If the contents of the report impinge on national security it is difficult to see how the government can agree to release the report.

However, then a further question is raised. If the report will not be released to the public how was it allowed to be leaked to the media? After the media exposure the government did not deny the report or displayed reticence but went out of its way to acknowledge its contents and resolved to probe the affair. One spokesperson of the Congress party blithely informed TV that since the media had obtained the report the matter had to be fully probed. But the government has not addressed the obvious question of how the media obtained the report. From all accounts it has not ordered an inquiry into who leaked the report and taken steps to punish the guilty. The circumstantial evidence of the government itself leaking the report is compelling. In the pursuit of petty partisan politics was the government oblivious of the grave implications that might flow from the leakage?

That is not all. Politicians further endangered the situation. BJP President Mr. Rajnath Singh defended General VK Singh and charged the UPA government with targeting him because he shared a platform with Mr. Narendra Modi. The Punjab Congress was quick to retaliate. Captain Amarinder Singh reiterated the allegation in the report that General VK Singh had misused TSD to attempt scuttling the appointment of the current Army Chief General Bikram Singh. He challenged Punjab Chief Minister Mr. Prakash Singh Badal to clarify his stand since he was supporting the BJP and Mr. Narendra Modi.

Have India ’s politicians gone stark raving mad? In the pursuit of their stupid and petty rivalries they are creating a situation that could encourage polarization between Hindu and Sikh, between Haryana and Punjab . Whatever the truth of real or imagined differences between army generals, these might be based upon entirely professional grounds. But in public perception the differences could most likely be seen as between communities and states. If such perception is allowed to grow, how will it affect all the ranks in the army?

The TSD unit was conceived and created after the 26/11 terrorist attack in Mumbai. The purpose of this top secret unit was to counter terrorism. Now not only the existence of this top secret unit is blown, but efforts are actually being made to reveal its operations and functioning in order to settle political scores. The most far reaching consequences of this sorry episode might well be General VK Singh rebuttal of the allegations against him publicized by the government. In an interview to Times Now TV channel he furnished damaging details of how the army has been operating in Jammu and Kashmir for the past many decades. His revelations make mockery of India ’s official stand on Kashmir.

One can imagine how gleefully members of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) in China and the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) in Pakistan would be with rapt attention watching the unfolding exposure of the functioning of India’s top secret army unit established to counter terrorism.

Share this:


1 Comment
Posted in Nation
Has Government committed treason? Sep
22
      2 Votes

Not surprisingly the controversy created by the media exposure and its subsequent official confirmation of the alleged misuse of the Technical Services Division (TSD) by former Army Chief General VK Singh is expected to snowball into a major national crisis. But the crisis may not evolve as those who leaked the information might imagine. According to The Indian Express that published the report General Singh had conveyed a warning that if they went ahead and published it “they will get it in the neck”. General Singh reportedly told the Press Trust of India (PTI) news agency that anyone recommending a probe into the functioning of TSD was being nonsensical because its operations were meant to be secret.

General Singh might have enlightened the public a little more. The mere fact that the inquiry into the functioning of TSD was “secret” suggests that the TSD operation was not only secret but probably “top secret”. If that is the case the consequences for the government as well as for media outlets utilized by the government could be very serious. In that event even the existence of TSD should never have been publicized. Further, if there is exposure of the actual working of the top secret unit, leaking information about it may well be considered treasonable under law, regardless of whether infromation is true or false. It involves national security. Such information can help the nation’s enemies. Even knowledge of the existence of TSD can help the nation’s enemies.

Did the government factor this aspect into its calculations before rushing to the media with its leaks? The last on this issue has not been heard. Events thus far may be in fact just the start of a crisis that could traumatize the system.

Share this:


Leave a comment
Posted in Nation
President, army and governance! Sep
21
      1 Vote

According to media reports the Defence Ministry constituted a secret Board of Officers body headed by Lt General Vinod Bhatia to probe alleged irregularities committed during the tenure of former Army Chief General VK Singh. It is alleged that General Singh set up a controversial Military Intelligence unit, Technical Services Division (TSD) that misused secret funds to conduct unauthorized covert operations that interfered in domestic politics. According to reports General Bhatia has advised a fuller probe by an external agency like the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The report alleges that TDS misused secret funds in an effort to destabilize the Jammu and Kashmir government, as well as block the promotion of the present Army Chief General Bikram Singh. The media report has furnished details about how these irregularities were sought to be accomplished.

This report was played up as a first page banner in The Indian Express, and appeared as an unobtrusive single column in the inside pages of The Times of India. The Express claims that it tried unsuccessfully to contact General VK Singh but managed to interact through a mutual contact that quoted the General to say that the report was rubbish and the government was motivated by the fact that he had shared a public platform with opposition leader Mr. Narendra Modi. General Bhatia had submitted his report to the Defence Ministry in March this year. This is an amazing episode and offers glaring evidence of how deeply governance and responsibility to preserve national security have sunk. The following questions need to be addressed.

First, now that the report has been quoted in the media it has to be established whether the allegations leveled by General Bhatia’s team of officers are valid. If true it reveals a shocking state of affairs in which a serving Army Chief can so misuse his powers to further political ends unconnected to his call of duty. If untrue, it reveals an equally shocking state of affairs in which politics has infected the armed forces to allow such false and motivated allegations to be made in order to settle differences within the Defence Ministry. Secondly, the report was submitted in March. Why has it surfaced only now almost six months later after the Defence Minister reportedly has got into the act? Does this validate General Singh’s reported comment that he is being targeted only because he shared a public platform with Mr. Narendra Modi? Thirdly, if it be assumed that the report has substance surely there are various discreet methods of addressing the issue, of even indirectly punishing the guilty, and keep the controversy away from public attention?

Transparency in governance is an excellent principle and the media cannot be criticized for playing up the report when offered the chance. But does it behoove a government to throw all considerations of national security to the winds and jeopardize it by publicizing such an episode if indeed it occurred as alleged? What kind of government is ruling India , and what kind of priorities does it have?

Finally, one cannot but reflect once again whether there can ever be accountability in our collapsing democracy unless the President discharges the responsibilities assigned to his post by our Constitution. It is weeks since communal riots exposed the failure of law and order in Uttar Pradesh. Every single party spokesperson has demanded that the government be dismissed. Official spokespersons of the Congress have said that law and order has collapsed. Yet the central government remains a mute spectator although it claims that the rule of law has collapsed in the state. Neither the Prime Minister nor the President has taken a single tiny step to introduce Governor’s rule. The latest episode related to the TSD report has grave implications for the state of affairs in our armed forces as well as for national security. The President as the Supreme Commander of the armed forces is directly responsible to safeguard both. Will he still remain mute?

Share this:


Leave a comment
Posted in Nation
Modi’s poll campaign error! Sep
19
      Rate This

From all accounts Mr. Narendra Modi’s inaugural campaign rally in Rewari after being anointed Prime Ministerial candidate of the BJP was the largest ever seen in the district. In some of his earlier rallies also common people had flocked to his meetings with great enthusiasm. Obviously, in addition to the formidable publicity and mobilization organized by the RSS and powerful business interests supporting Mr. Modi, certain qualities of his persona too have caught the imagination of the masses. This has been seized by political analysts and his party’s leaders to describe Mr. Modi as the first great national Other Backward Classes (OBC) leader who might become Prime Minister. Media analysts may be forgiven for their ignorance of political ground realities to describe Mr. Modi as a national OBC leader. But surely the poll managers of the BJP ought to have known better?



It is a grievous flaw to describe Mr. Modi as a national OBC icon. Not only are BJP leaders assiduously promoting this image, even Mr. Modi himself seems to have become victim of this flawed propaganda. Mr. Modi belongs to the Ghanchi caste found only in the state of Gujarat . It is a sub-caste in the OBC category. People belonging to the Teli caste in other states may empathize with the Ghanchi caste because of a shared occupational history related to extraction of oil. Otherwise the Ghanchi caste will have little relevance outside Gujarat . Belonging to the Ghanchi caste makes Mr. Modi an OBC leader. It does not make him a national icon of OBC voters. There is no national OBC icon. There cannot be a national OBC icon. There can only be a national icon who is an OBC. The distinction should be appreciated.

The very logic of caste identity runs counter to a nationwide OBC identity. Caste mobilization becomes easy precisely because the approach is tribal. Caste leaders often unite to make common cause. That makes it easy and convenient for the big business corporate sector to use money power to split or align political forces to suit their interest. But when have castes en block voted for a leader belonging to another caste because of his OBC status? Why do not the Kurmis in Bihar vote for Mr. Laloo Yadav, or the Yadavs vote for Mr. Nitish Kumar? Before Mr. Modi became his party’s election campaign chief the BJP had already laid the ground for positive poll results in UP after Mr. Rajnath Singh brought back Mr. Kalyan Singh into his party’s fold. The revived Thakur-Kurmi alliance had earlier brought the BJP its largest ever parliamentry tally of 57 MPs. With Miss Uma Bharati entering UP politics, in addition to her oratory expected to consolidate the Hindutva vote bank, she will also undoubtedly attract Lodh voters belonging to her caste.

Yet media analysts and BJP poll managers are busy trying to exploit Mr. Modi’s OBC status to project him as the first great OBC national leader who might become Prime Minister. Unfortunately, Mr. Modi has bought this flawed approach. Celebrating his birthday recently in Gujarat Mr. Modi reached out and invited many OBC leaders of the organized and unorganized sectors to his function. National thinking has become so corrupted and distorted by the caste reservation policy and mobilization of quick vote banks that an obvious truth escaped media analysts as well as the poll campaign managers of the BJP. If enthusiastic masses have flocked to Mr. Modi’s rallies it is not because he is a national OBC icon. It is because people have recognized that Mr. Modi has risen from very humble origins like themselves to acquire a national political status. If the masses empathize with Mr. Modi it is not because he is an OBC but because he was poor and is now powerful.

The flawed approach adopted by Mr. Modi and the BJP regarding the importance of his OBC status can have very far reaching consequences. It will determine what kind of Indian will emerge tomorrow if Mr. Modi does become Prime Minister. On his birthday Mr. Modi invited OBC leaders belonging to the organized and unorganized sectors of labour. OBC leaders can mobilize votes. That is an understandably attractive attribute. But so can union leaders of organized and unorganized labour mobilize voters. Why could not Mr. Modi have focused on them instead? Does Mr. Modi seek an India of his dreams symbolized by his proposed Statue of Unity to consolidate on the prevalent national divisive culture based upon over 4000 contending castes battling for economic crumbs?

Or does he seek to create a new Indian with a national identity above caste and community ready to confront the 21st century world? Will he support caste-based reservation or economic criteria for job and educational reservation? Will he promote universal compulsory primary education to lift all castes from poverty? These are some questions that Mr. Modi and the leaders of the BJP need to ponder if they seek a genuine political change. They have to decide whether they want victory in the present or a victory for the future. Do they want to cater to India of the present or to India of the future that will belong to the young?

Share this:


Leave a comment
Posted in Nation
Modi’s proposed Statue of Unity! Sep
17
      1 Vote

Concluding his first public rally in Rewari after being anointed Prime Ministerial candidate of the BJP, Mr. Narendra Modi appealed to his audience to donate pieces of iron from each village in the state to be used for constructing his proposed Statue of Unity on the sea coast of Gujarat . Mr. Modi wants similar donations of iron pieces from each village in each state across the nation in honour of Sardar Vallabhai Patel who will symbolize unity in the proposed statue. Mr. Modi has declared his intention of constructing the tallest statue in the world, taller than America ’s Statue of Liberty, in honour of Sardar Patel.

This writer has serious objection to the proposal. Sardar Patel was undoubtedly a very great man, as were Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru. Patel performed great service to the nation by unifying the princely states of India after Independence . But though these great leaders did great things for the nation they also committed unforgivable errors the consequence of which continue to haunt our nation. These leaders, mainly Sardar Patel, united Bharat but they divided India . They divided India without the slightest justification. They divided India because they allowed themselves to be influenced and manipulated by the British.

With just over 1000 people killed in Punjab through communal riots engineered by the British administration immediately after Lord Mountbatten became India ’s Viceroy, and about 12000 killed in Bihar and Bengal over a period of two years, these leaders violated their solemn pledge to the people of India by accepting Partition. Gandhi on the fateful day, June 3, 1947 when the Congress formally accepted Partition, conveniently observed his ‘day of silence’. Nehru and Patel were the hawks in the Congress Working Committee in favour of accepting Partition. JB Kripalani, Jayaprakash Narain and Ram Manohar Lohia who opposed Partition were overruled by the rest. On June 2, on eve of the decision, Gandhi assured Mountbatten who visited him that he would not create any hurdles against the decision.

In what manner then might Sardar Patel symbolize unity? After two lawyers from Gujarat, Gandhi and Jinnah, and two aristocrats from Uttar Pradesh, Nehru and Liaquat Ali, butchered and cut asunder Punjab and Bengal displaying their ignorance about the ground realities in these states, people today should display some sensitivity towards the sentiments of provinces where over a million people were slaughtered and over ten million rendered homeless due to the follies of these leaders. In case critics challenge this view about the unforgivable decision about the Partition, let them note that both Gandhi and Nehru acknowledged their error. Gandhi wanted to settle down in Pakistan to undo the Partition just before he was assassinated thanks to ignored security measures during Sardar Patel’s tenure as Home Minister. Nehru sent Sheikh Abdullah to Pakistan to plead with President Ayub Khan to reunite India and Pakistan through a proposed confederation during which effort he died.

Therefore this writer would like to remind Mr. Narendra Modi and many others from different parts of India that they may have their history and may choose to honour whom they wish. The peoples of Punjab and Bengal have their own history and their own memories to recall. Congress leaders today may be the best in the land. They are welcome to govern India . But the Congress Party as Imperial Britain’s instrument to partition India deserves to be buried. Let Congress leaders reinvent themselves into a new organization. After all, this demand merely echoes the last wish of the most revered Congress icon, Mahatma Gandhi, on the day before he died.

Mr. Modi is welcome to construct his Statue of Unity. The people of Punjab and Bengal might seek their own way of responding to history. Human folly can delay but not derail history. Ultimately, cultural nationalism will triumph.

Share this:


Leave a comment
Posted in Nation
Profit & Loss of UP riots! Sep
14
      Rate This

All political parties and media outlets seem agreed that the recent Muzzafarnagar riots which cost 40 lives and brought untold misery to thousands who fled their homes, were the result of a conspiracy. But all seem to disagree about who was behind the conspiracy. The UP government was suspiciously lax in acting on warnings issued by the central government months earlier. Inexplicably it allowed a Jat mahapanchayat of 1.5 lakh people just 20 km from Muzaffarnagar in violation of prohibitory orders in force in the entire district due to prevailing tension. Thousands of vehicles and tractors from Haryana, Delhi and the neighbouring districts of UP were allowed to descend on the venue of the mahapanchayat. One UP minister has acknowledged that there was an administrative lapse. Samajwadi Party (SP) leader Mr. Mulayam Singh was at pains to stress that the riots were not communal but ethnic – between Jats and Muslims. Chief Minister Mr. Akhilesh Yadav has accused other political parties for the conspiracy.

The UP administration has charged that a five minute fake video was used to fan violence. One BJP leader has been arrested in connection with that video. The district administration of Muzafarnagar lodged criminal cases against a senior BJP leader and former minister along with three other BJP leaders for violating the prohibitory order and allegedly delivered provocative speeches during the Jat mahapanchayat. The BJP leaders have denied charges. Leaders of the Bharat Kisan Union (BKU) and the Congress were also charged on similar grounds. Allegations and counter allegations of conspiracy to instigate the riots flew thick and fast between the BJP, SP, Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) and Congress. However, it is futile to speculate who was behind the conspiracy. It is futile to speculate that if there was indeed a conspiracy, whether it was the work of individual politicians or was it sanctioned by their respective political organizations. What can be assessed with some accuracy is the political impact of riots. Which party gained, and which party lost?

The SP is a huge loser. It is likely to lose its Muslim vote which is vital for its electoral success. Had Muzzafarnagar limited itself to communal tension the SP would have gained. That explains the seemingly deliberate administrative dereliction of duty. The Muslims of West UP who supported Mr. Ajit Singh’s Rashtriya Lok DaL (RLD) might have been weaned away to support SP. But things got out of hand. The Jat mahapanchayat was followed by horrendous riots. The government’s failure has left the Muslim community bitter and alienated.

The BSP could be a gainer. The first Muslim priority as of present is to remove this government. In the assembly elections the BSP offers the best chance of doing it. Similarly the Congress could be a gainer. For parliamentary elections the Muslim vote will attempt to block the BJP. On present reckoning the Congress provides the only hope of accomplishing that.

The BJP is the biggest gainer. Notwithstanding Mr. Mulayam Singh’s nitpicking distinction between communal riots and ethnic riots, the accession of the Jat vote to the BJP, along with widespread communal polarization following the riots across the state, could provide a huge boost to BJP prospects.

The RLD is the biggest loser. The traditional harmony between Muslims and Jats carefully nurtured by the late Choudhary Charan Singh rendered West UP a solid base for the RLD. That harmony has been shattered. The cost of this division will be very heavy. It could destroy the dream of carving a new state of Harit Pradesh in West UP. Both the Jats and the Muslims yearned for it. The Muslims are one third of the population in the region. The Deoband centre of religious learning is in the region. The destruction of the fine balance between Jats and Muslims may be irreparable for a long time. Both communities may now repent at leisure.

It is in this cynical way that politicians will calculate the outcome of the Muzzafarnagar riots. They will not spare a thought for the heartrending tragedy befallen to innocent women and children. Their crime was that they belonged to a community. Their weakness was that they were poor. Their tragedy was that they lived in a country where politics is conducted by a cynical, cruel and corrupt class of leaders.

Share this:


1 Comment
Posted in Nation
Modified Modi! Sep
12
      2 Votes

According to media reports the BJP will formally anoint Mr. Narendra Modi as its Prime Ministerial candidate when the party’s parliamentary board meeting is held on Friday. Some time earlier the view had been expressed in these columns that there was no substantive difference between Prime Minister Mr. Manmohan Singh and Mr. Narendra Modi insofar as approach to economic policy was concerned. Both leaders seem to be focused mainly on quick growth based upon foreign investment and delivery of maximum facilities to the big corporate sector.



However, this writer deemed Mr. Modi superior because he was described as a “muscular” version of the Prime Minister. In Gujarat he offered quicker and smoother delivery to big business than the Prime Minister could at the centre. The reason was simple. There was no extra constitutional authority to derail and slow down Mr. Modi in Gujarat as the office of the National Advisory Council did to the Prime Minister in Delhi . The Prime Minister was helpless. He was appointed by Mrs. Sonia Gandhi and had to function under her direction. It was thought that Mr. Modi would have no such fetters to implement the economic model in which the Prime Minister reposed his faith. That view it seems was too hasty. Mr. Modi may in fact be no more muscular than the Prime Minister.

Recent events should leave no doubt that if Mr. Modi is declared as the BJP’s Prime Ministerial candidate it will be only due to the pressure exerted by the RSS on the party. The RSS has appointed Mr. Modi as the party’s Prime Ministerial candidate and left it to the party to announce the decision. Mr. Modi cannot be unaware of the crucial RSS support needed for his elevation. The support reportedly was promised after extended parleys and eventually the decision was taken after agreement was reached on the minimum demands conveyed by the RSS. According to media reports the four conditions set by the RSS for Mr. Modi to receive support were to pledge building a grand Ram Temple in Ayodhya, to enforce the contentious Uniform Civil Code across the country, to repeal of Article 370 in J&K and end the special status of the state, and to press for full protection of cows. All four conditions reflect policies of traditional Hindutva.

However, the merits or otherwise of the policies insisted upon by the RSS are not important. What is significant is that the RSS is insistent upon the implementation of its agenda. Like Mrs. Sonia Gandhi choosing Mr. Manmohan Singh as Prime Minister, the RSS has chosen Mr. Modi as its candidate. But unlike Mrs. Gandhi who established her National Advisory Council to offer policy directives to the government after Mr. Manmohan Singh assumed office, Mr. Mohan Bhagwat has not wasted time. He has already laid down the minimum policy agenda. This is just the start.

Many more policy directives should be expected if Mr. Modi does indeed become Prime Minister. Although Mr. Modi therefore may not prove to be a more muscular version of Mr. Manmohan Singh, constrained as he will be by an extra constitutional body, Mr. Mohan Bhagwat certainly is showing signs of being a much more muscular version of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi. This aspect needs to be considered carefully by all the supporters of Mr. Modi. It should be amply clear that apart from support by members of the public Mr. Modi is heavily backed by the most powerful big business corporate sector. Apart from Mr. Modi’s own undoubted attributes, his popularity depends heavily on the massive support rendered to him by the big business electronic media. There is nothing surprising about that. Big business will protect its own interests. But a serious question arises.

Many supporters of Mr. Modi draw comfort from the fact that he has not personally referred to any of the pro-Hindu policies associated with the hardcore Hindutva elements of the RSS. These supporters are being delusional. They betray their ignorance about how politics is played out. The approval of every action and every statement by any of the sources in the BJP will devolve on Mr. Modi as the election campaign in charge. His silence is meaningless. Silence will be taken as assent. If Mr. Modi disapproves of any policy or statement by members of his party he will have to contradict them publicly to record his dissent. Voters are influenced by whole parties and not by their perception of any one individual, however powerful or charismatic.

What should be clear therefore to all supporters of Mr. Modi, especially the powerful big business elements, is that the RSS agenda must be factored in their calculations. This is because Mr. Modi and RSS will be inseparable if he becomes the Prime Minister. There will be nothing wrong with that if Mr. Modi and the RSS see eye to eye on all policy matters. If on the other hand Mr. Modi’s personal predilection is at variance from the RSS, there could be a very serious problem. In that event Mr. Modi’s government could become as paralyzed as Mr. Manmohan Singh’s government. There would be precisely the same kind of diarchy in governance as paralyzed the UPA government. The paralysis in the UPA government became so palpable that even Congress General Secretary Mr. Digvijay Singh was constrained to acknowledge publicly that the existing system of diarchy was undesirable.

The powerful vested interests favouring Mr. Modi should therefore carefully scrutinize the total RSS agenda in order to continue their support. This applies to all the international big business executives who descended from Europe and South America to endorse Mr. Modi, to all the young Indians who seek a modern twenty-first century nation and look up to Mr. Modi, to all the biggest business houses in the nation who are solidly backing Mr. Modi, and to all the mainstream media TV anchors who swoon with excitement each time Mr. Modi sneezes. It is entirely possible of course that the RSS policies may exceed their wildest dreams of promoting economic growth and progress in India . But that is a prospect it would be more prudent for them to assess now instead of later. What needs to be understood is that either Mr. Modi is totally supportive of RSS policies, or if he is not, there are prospects once again of paralyzing diarchy that could ruin governance in India.

Share this:


Leave a comment
Posted in Nation

Post navigation← Older posts

Media’s response to Pak Envoy! Oct

9

      1 Vote

During a press interview to a foreign journalist President Pranab Mukherjee said that even if cross border terrorism was perpetrated by non-state actors as Islamabad claimed, the Pakistan government could not evade responsibility. The territory was under the jurisdiction of the government, the President pointed out. “Non-state actors do not descend from heaven,

” he said. This view was echoed by Information and Broadcasting (I&B) Minister Mr. Manish Tewari who told media that the crossing over by terrorists and non-state actors suggested either complicity or negligence by the Pakistan government. “Obviously these terrorists or non-state actors are not coming out of a vacuum,”

he said.

The Pakistan High Commissioner to India Mr. Salman Bashir gave a veiled rejoinder to these remarks. But he focused his criticism mainly against the media. He accused the media of focusing exclusively on “so-called” incursions and infiltrations from across the border.

He said:

“Whoever is making the argument that they have not descended from heaven, I want to ask who are these thousands of people who are involved in heinous acts of terrorism in Pakistan . Have they descended from heaven? We agree they have not descended from heaven, from where are they being funded and sourced?”

One can appreciate the constraints under which Pakistan ’s official envoy to India has to function. Mr. Bashir said something, and he implied something. Both his assertion and implication deserve attention. Since he thought it fit to direct his ire against the Indian media this writer takes the liberty of directly responding to his criticism.

Mr. Bashir cannot blame the Indian media of responding to continued incursions from across the border which for diplomatic compulsions he described as “so-called”. But he was right to point out the failure of the Indian government as well as the media to adequately differentiate between the government and non-state actors in Pakistan . Mr. Bashir has rightly asserted that “thousands of terrorists” are operating against Pakistan who obviously did not descend from heaven. By implication this is tacit admission of failure of the Pakistan government. It is a fact that there are substantially more victims of terrorism in Pakistan than in India including in the state of J&K. Then Mr. Bashir went on to question the source of funding and training of these terrorists. His central plea was for the enhancement of cooperation between Islamabad and New Delhi.

He said:

“We have evidence which we have shared and are prepared to share with the rest of the world and particularly with the government of India on fuelling of acts of terrorism in Pakistan .”

Mr. Bashir’s plea for greater cooperation between India and Pakistan to fight terror clearly indicates that by questioning the source of terror funding he was not pointing a finger at India . He was obviously indicating the hand of Al Qaeda which inspires global terrorism. In the light of the reality of terrorist activity in Pakistan funded and directed by global forces the Indian government is clearly remiss in not taking an initiative for closer cooperation with Pakistan to combat terror. New Delhi ’s inhibition may be explained by its continued doubts about how deeply subverted Pakistan ’s security establishment is by pro-terror elements. Well, the Indian media has no such inhibitions. Since Mr. Bashir squarely blamed the Indian media I take the liberty of directly addressing him. I put a question to the Pakistan government through him that the Indian government has failed to do.

Mr. Bashir you seek closer cooperation between India and Pakistan , you admit that there are thousands of terrorists operating inside Pakistan . You indicate that they are funded and directed from abroad. You tacitly imply though you do not state that they cannot operate without help from a section of the official machinery. I agree with your overall analysis. My question is: Will the Pakistan government accept an offer of joint intelligence and joint operations against terror to wipe out these non-state actors from both our countries?

I know that you may not deign to respond to such a question from a mere media person instead of from the government. But let me assure you. If you do answer the media will compel the Indian government to respond appropriately.

So will you respond?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

The President’s curious priorities! Oct

8

      1 Vote

After the media pointed out that the credit for the rollback of the Ordinance on convicted MPs went to President Pranab Mukherjee and not to Congress Vice-President Rahul Gandhi who exploited the President’s known reluctance to sign it, Mr. LK Advani praised the President for his decision. However, the President reacted to this praise most curiously. The President with uncalled for modesty went out of his way to dissociate himself from the decision to roll back the Ordinance. It is known that he sat over the Ordinance and was reluctant to sign it. By signing it he could have possibly attracted strictures from the Supreme Court to make his position untenable. Understandably he mulled over the matter and shared his views with UPA Ministers who called on him to discuss the Ordinance. It was after that when Mr. Rahul Gandhi jumped into the controversy to corner credit. Mr. Advani’s praise for the President therefore was a routine and unexceptionable observation.

However the President reacted to the media in response to such praise by saying:

“I cannot comment on what the Opposition has said about my role. My duties are now completely determined by the Indian Constitution.”

The praise for the President was precisely because he did follow the Constitution by not immediately signing the Ordinance. Why, then, his curiously defensive rejoinder? Eyebrows were further raised after the President’s son, Mr. Abhijeet Mukherjee, called on the chief victim of the scrapped Ordinance, Mr. Lalu Prasad Yadav, who was in jail. The popular conclusion derived from this visit was that Mr. Mukherjee had gone there to convince Mr. Yadav that the decision not to sign the Ordinance reflected no personal motive of the President but was dictated by the Constitution. This was unnecessary. Mr. Yadav one is sure is sufficiently knowledgeable to have been aware of that. If such speculation has any basis it is certainly odd that the President should be so concerned about Mr. Yadav’s feelings. The President after all is above party politics.

Alas, it does not seem that the President is as much above party politics as he should be. His continued silence over the horrendous events in Andhra is equally mystifying. After the Union government hastily declared the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh by ceding the new state of Telangana despite the state assembly being overwhelmingly opposed to the measure, the entire state is in flames. Apart from mammoth public protest and indefinite fasts launched by politicians, the whole state is without electric power because of a strike by workers. And this situation has been growing and worsening for days. Has not the Constitutional machinery in the state collapsed to necessitate the application of Article 356 to impose President’s rule in Andhra to restore order? But the Prime Minister and the Union cabinet are mute.

Surprisingly, even the President is silent. Article 78 (b) of the Constitution states: “It shall be the duty of the Prime Minister to furnish such information relating to the administration of the affairs of the Union and proposals for legislation as the President may call for.” Should not the President invoke this Article and initiate action? Surely the millions of agitated people in Andhra Pradesh deserve as much attention as Mr. Lalu Yadav should get?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Snooping, security and privacy! Oct

5

      1 Vote

After Julian Assange and the Wikileaks controversy it is the Edgar Snowden affair that has rocked the world. Snowden was a government contractor working at the National Security Agency (NSA) in America. The NSA in order to protect the US snoops on citizens in America and abroad looking for terrorist connections. The NSA collects and analyses foreign communication and foreign signals of intelligence in order to protect the US. In an interview in Hong Kong Snowden leaked top-secret government surveillance programs that led to an international debate over national security versus individual privacy. In a recent statement to the European Parliament Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Snowden said:

“A culture of secrecy has denied our societies the opportunity to determine the appropriate balance between the human right of privacy and the governmental interest in investigation.”

Among Snowden’s leaks was information about secret US surveillance of foreign governments including Brazil and India. The Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff in protest lashed out at the US in the UN General Assembly and canceled her official visit to Washington. Critics in India not only criticized the US but berated the Indian government after disclosures that it had also like America and China snooped on citizens.

Whatever the extent of public outrage over official snooping, it will not and cannot stop. The world needs a reality check. As long as terrorism survives in the world and weapons of mass destruction can be manufactured by private citizens in a garage, surveillance is a survival imperative for governments. What is required is that such surveillance by all governments be monitored and controlled by the UN.

Technology has not only enabled private citizens to manufacture weapons of mass destruction, but also to snoop on governments and citizens alike. In the foreseeable future therefore privacy cannot be guaranteed for any citizen or government. In the event is it not prudent for people to adjust to the new reality? In other words technology will render total transparency for governments and private citizens unavoidable. It will signify a game changing new culture for mankind. Should not people therefore start adjusting to this change and make their lives totally transparent? It may lead to a happier and safer world.

Indeed, there could well be advantages in being snooped upon! While many people criticize the government’s snooping policy, so do I but for different reasons. My complaint is that the government does not bug my telephone, hack my computer or bug my regular haunts where I have coffee sessions with friends. I want to be heard but nobody listens. Does the government think that it is only the rich and the powerful that can provide useful information?

So can ordinary people like this writer. The government should bug ordinary people too in order to create a level playing field. Not only Neera Radia and Amar Singh are worth snooping on. People like me too have valuable ideas that would help the government. Alas! All my ideas and the pearls of wisdom exchanged with friends go waste because the government does not snoop on me. If the government were to do so would not some of that wisdom penetrate the dense minds of our rulers to improve governance and conditions in our nation?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Politics of convicted MPs! Oct

3

      1 Vote

The current controversy over the Supreme Court (SC) judgment and the government’s Ordinance on the continuance of convicted MPs in legislatures needs to be appreciated in its proper perspective. Right now corruption is a very emotive issue. The public not surprisingly has jumped to the conclusion that the Ordinance which sought to overrule the SC judgment was part of political chicanery. But to what extent does the SC judgment or for that matter the Ordinance actually affect the prevalence of corruption in the system? Is everybody in the government, parliament and judiciary missing the wood for the trees?

The existing Representation of Peoples (RP) Act was challenged by two writ petitions filed by advocate Lily Thomas and Lok Prahari, through its General Secretary S. N. Shukla. The petitioners questioned the legality of MPs continuing in parliament despite conviction by obtaining a stay order and further hearing from a higher court. The SC considered the RP Act unconstitutional and ruled that immediately after conviction the MP with a sentence of two or more years.must be disqualified. The Union cabinet drafted an ordinance to neutralize the Supreme Court’s order mandating immediate disqualification. The government held that if the conviction was stayed by the higher court within 90 days the elected representative should not be disqualified. But the government in its ordinance denied the convicted MP perks and voting rights till being cleared by a higher court. Only, the MP’s seat would remain occupied and there would be no by-election.

Recognizing ground realities the government considered the ease with which motivated and fraudulent prosecution and conviction could be secured from lower courts to harm even innocent politicians. Law Minister Kapil Sibal said that “everybody knows the judicial system has miserably failed to save itself from corruption charges and nepotism”. Even though the Ordinance remedy may be flawed the truth of judicial corruption cannot be denied and has indeed been voiced by Supreme Court judges and reputed jurists.

The media has gone to town attributing Rahul Gandhi’s outburst against the Ordinance as the trigger to clean up the system and check corruption and criminalization. The reality is of course that it was the President’s doubts about the legality of the Ordinance conveyed to cabinet ministers that was seized by the Congress party to enact Rahul Gandhi’s drama in order to obtain credit. The entire issue is being projected by the media and perhaps being swallowed by the public as a great fight against corruption launched by the Congress inspired by Rahul Gandhi. This is laughable. The politicians, the judiciary and the media are living in world of make believe. Consider the reality.

Two MPs, Lalu Yadav and Rashid Masood have been unseated in parliament after being convicted in corruption cases. Their corruption was committed decades ago. Lalu Yadav has been convicted after 17 years and Masood has been convicted after 23 years of their misdemeanors. Even if neither was a sitting MP both would have enjoyed three of four terms of being in parliament before this recent conviction. What kind of fight against corruption and cleansing of parliament is that? Currently there would be a dozen leading MPs involved in corruption during the Commonwealth Games and other mega scams under investigation and facing court proceedings. Will they be unseated after remaining in parliament for the next several terms and being convicted after a few decades?

The prime need is to make mandatory the completion of all court cases within six months so that speedy justice can punish the guilty. That calls for serious judicial reform. Instead of addressing that the obsession with legal nitpicking related to the RP Act through Supreme Court rulings and government Ordinances is meaningless and irrelevant. It is designed only to deceive the public into believing that corruption is genuinely being fought.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

PM’s US trip succeeds despite sabotage! Oct

1

      1 Vote

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to America has been as successful as could be reasonably expected. It was a crucial trip during which the PM met President Obama, Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and heads of other SAARC nations. In his meeting with President Obama a game changing breakthrough was achieved not sufficiently appreciated by analysts. America and India have agreed to become closest partners for defence cooperation. For transfer of defence technology India ’s relations with the US are now at par with Britain.

This is what Pandit Nehru sought from President Kennedy after the Sino-Indian conflict of 1962 when the latter’s death aborted the effort. This is what President Bush sought when he signed the nuclear deal but that effort failed because the Indian government scared of domestic criticism failed to deliver. Now agreement has been reached. The first sign of change is evident from India ’s consent to participate in joint naval exercises in the world’s largest maritime exercise involving dozens of countries. China is not invited to the exercise and the People’s Liberation Army has expressed strong opposition to it. Regardless of the PM’s future the Indo-US deal has been signed. It is likely to endure because it is not between political parties but between governments.

The PM’s meeting with his Pakistani counterpart was as crucial. Though no breakthrough was achieved or attempted the ice was broken. Contrary to the expectations of sceptics the PM addressed India ’s immediate concerns about border violations and terror camps. Mr. Sharif did acknowledge those concerns and promised action to stabilize the border. After he delivers some results the PMs will meet to carry the dialogue further. Already undated invitations for such meeting have been extended. If the PM achieved a big step forward towards the US , he also managed a baby half-step towards Pakistan . Now it remains to be seen how the agreements of this visit actually translate into results.

Anyone following the run-up to the Prime Minister’s visit would marvel at the number of glitches that suddenly erupted to mar its prospects. And for each manufactured event to scuttle progress in the talks the media played its part by a hysterical negative approach to the visit. The opposition parties by their strident criticism of the PM while he was abroad, throwing all accepted diplomatic norms to the winds, also played its part. It is a well established norm that opposition parties do not attack a head of state when he is abroad or when opposition leaders themselves are abroad. This is what democratic bipartisan approach to foreign policy denotes. But the BJP launched a shrill attack against the PM demanding an explanation while he was in the US.

The rot started with Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi. He enacted a preplanned unprecedented theatrical performance to rubbish the PM just hours before he was scheduled to meet President Obama. This demeaned the PM in the eyes of the opposition and demands for his resignation were voiced. It is a reflection of our sick state of politics that even the PM’s former press Advisor Mr. Sanjay Baru was swept along the popular current to advise the PM to resign. It is amazing that not a single voice within or outside the Congress party has made the obvious democratic demand. After the intemperate, ill-timed and irresponsible statement by the ruling party’s vice-president to damage prospects of international negotiations, it is Rahul Gandhi who should be sacked from his post if he does not voluntarily resign.

Why should the PM be asked to quit?

Narendra Modi in a public rally in Delhi lashed out at Gandhi. But he was equally amiss himself. In his speech he sought to damage the PM’s foreign visit by uttering two falsehoods. The first was that the PM had allegedly lamented to Obama that India was a very poor nation in need of help. From where did Modi get his information?

From all accounts the PM discussed terrorism and not India ’s poverty. The second falsehood was even more intriguing. Based upon a TV quote by a noted Pakistani journalist Modi attempted to further muddy the atmosphere just hours before the PM and Nawaz Sharif were to meet. He quoted Pakistani anchor of Geo TV, Hamid Mir, who alleged on TV that Nawaz Sharif had described the PM as a “village woman” pleading before the US President. This was supposed to be said over a breakfast interview given by Sharif to two other journalists and Mir. The two other journalists, Barkha Dutt and a Pakistani journalist Absar Alam, both denied Mir’s version. It seemed that Sharif said that concerns against Pakistan could be addressed directly to Islamabad instead of to Washington.

This was in line with India ’s consistent stand contrary to Pakistan ’s earlier approach that Indo-Pak ties should be bilateral without third party intervention. After Barkha Dutt and Absar Alam rubbished Mir’s claims the latter confessed that Sharif made no criticism of the PM. He lamely tried to explain away his contradicted version by saying that Sharif spoke in jest. But why did not Mir say this in his original comment on TV? In that remark he even indicated that Sharif considered Manmohan Singh weak and was looking forward to doing business with his successor after 2014.

One will not speculate whether all this happened by coincidence or by design, and if by design, the inspiration of these incidents. Hamid Mir is a powerful and influential TV journalist in Pakistan. Currently there are differences between the Pakistan army and the civil government over how to tackle the Taliban. Nawaz Sharif is seeking a dialogue. The army wants to continue with the status quo by “fighting” the Taliban. Mir sympathized with the army by stating:

“It’s a very complicated situation. The army does not seem to be in the mood for talks as it has gained a lot of ground against the Taliban in the recent past.”

Mir should know. He has after all excellent contacts. He was in fact the last journalist to interview slain Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin laden in Afghanistan in 2002. It is difficult to believe that he could have accomplished this without the clearance, if not cooperation, of the ISI.

In summation, Rahul Gandhi, Narendra Modi and Hamid Mir all passed comments that could have damaged the PM’s US visit. Large sections of big business electronic media and the opposition joined them. Modi and Gandhi are repeatedly projected by the media as the two contenders for becoming prime minister. It is ironic that both contenders are on the same side insofar as the PM’s negotiations in the US were concerned. It is also intriguing that these three fed on each other’s narrative to rubbish the PM. But then, this does not necessarily suggest collusion. It could be pure coincidence. As for big business that funds both media and politics it may matter little which contender becomes PM. Heads I win, tails you lose!

For big business Modi and Gandhi might well be two sides of the same coin. But beyond business interests of the corporate sector there are also powerful international forces interested in damaging relations between India and the US , as well as between India and Pakistan . Now which international forces would be pleased if Indo-US and Indo-Pak elations deteriorated? It is for readers to ponder and arrive at their own conclusions.

Image (c) ibnlive.in.com

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

The great Congress mystery! Sep

30

      4 Votes

There is a mystery related to the functioning of the Congress party that nobody I have asked has been able to clear. The latest episode heightens the mystery. The Union cabinet along with the core group of the Congress party in the presence and with the consent of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi approved the draft of the Ordinance to protect criminal MPs. After the Ordinance was presented to the President he expressed doubts about its legality and delayed signing it. Meanwhile the opposition mounted a blistering attack against the Ordinance. Cabinet ministers and Congress party leaders stoutly defended the Ordinance and accused the opposition of being complicit in the decision to draft the Bill protecting criminal MPs.

Then Congress Vice President Mr. Rahul Gandhi without notice intervened in a Congress press conference and condemned the Ordinance in very strong and intemperate language. He did this while the PM was abroad about to hold very crucial meetings with several heads of states. The timing of Mr. Gandhi’s remarks was so significant that had he not been a leader of such limited understanding one might have concluded that he was representing a hostile foreign power seeking to damage India ’s foreign policy.

After Mr. Gandhi spoke the cabinet ministers and Congress party leaders instead of criticizing his performance somersaulted and fell in line making nonsense of their own earlier publicly stated remarks. This writer has never in his long career seen such a craven display of sycophancy and lack of self respect and honour as long as can be remembered.

Here then is the mystery. What is the secret of Mrs. Gandhi’s hold on all members of the Congress party? She cannot get votes. Her party is performing badly even in her own constituency despite campaigning by her and her family members. She has been accused by credible international sources of receiving illegal funds from foreign sources. She has been accused by credible international sources of having a secret illegal foreign bank account. She has never taken the trouble to deny charges. She has not displayed any significant expertise related to economic, foreign or political policy. Her son, Mr. Rahul Gandhi, is even less accomplished than her. There are serious and credible allegations of his having been detained in the US possessing unaccounted money and drugs and subsequently being released through intervention of the Indian government.

Despite all this, Congress party members from top to bottom behave like craven slaves of mother and son. One cannot fathom the reason for this. One would like to be enlightened. In conclusion this writer would like to clarify that he is not critical mainly of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi or Mr. Rahul Gandhi. They look after their interests as all people are expected to. It is the members of the Congress party that attract the strongest possible criticism. So obnoxious and counter productive is their conduct that it strengthens this writer’s belief that the Congress party must be buried in order to preserve Indian democracy.

Share this:

5 Comments

Posted in Nation

Kashmir exposures Convert crisis into opportunity! Sep

27

      1 Vote

Government should not overspend effort to undo the political damage inflicted by the recent leaked allegations by the Ministry of Defence and General VK Singh. The damage to India’s case in Kashmir cannot be undone. Just days after the recent disclosure terrorists have struck in Jammu to kill army and police personnel. More attacks should be expected by terrorists emboldened by the disclosures vindicating their allegations. Politics is about perception of facts and not about facts themselves. The recent disclosures have confirmed in the public mind all the perceived truths about India’s relationship with Kashmir repeatedly articulated by separatists and many other foreign powers. The government should instead seize the moment to convert a setback into opportunity and settle once and for all the Kashmir dispute that has bedeviled the subcontinent’s peace since Independence.

However, in order to attempt that the government must be honest enough to confront the truth and bold enough to dare an initiative.

What is the truth?

One need no iterate the oft repeated facts relating to the Kashmir dispute. Kashmir is not the problem but the symptom of the problem. The problem is the Partition. Kashmir was a state with contiguous borders with both India and Pakistan. The Hindu ruler of this Muslim majority state wanted independence and good relations with both nations. The attack by Pakistani raiders backed by its army to forcibly seize Kashmir forced the ruler’s hands. He acceded to India in order to obtain the Indian army’s help to repulse the enemy.

As Kashmir Chief Minister Mr. Omar Abdullah pointed out recently, Kashmir unlike other princely states of the Indian Union did not merge with India but stopped short after accession. That is why it has a special status and Article 370. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru at the time of accepting Kashmir’s instrument of accession stated that it was “subject to the will of the people of Kashmir”. This was followed by India’s acceptance of the UN Resolution regarding Plebiscite in Kashmir. For over six decades stupid policies pursued by the governments of India and Pakistan, both acting like foreign pawns, has denied the region peace and stability. The distorted approach of both governments that have behaved like Raja Jaichand and Mir Jafar to ally with foreigners against their own flesh and blood has its roots in the Partition.

Britain offered the opportunity to keep India united by presenting the Cabinet Mission Plan that would have created a federation. Jinnah accepted the proposal. Nehru rejected it because the Plan allowed the Muslim dominated units to secede after 10 years if they so wished. Like pathetic colonial minions the leaders of India and Pakistan accepted Independence and Partition without the borders of the new nations determined. Immediately after Independence, accompanied by Partition, riots engineered by interested foreign powers to perpetuate the division cost a million lives within a few months. Similarly the engineered Kashmir dispute led to the partition of the state in order to create a permanent bone of contention that would prevent reunification.

Nehru, who had rejected the Cabinet Mission Plan and a confederation when these were offered, attempted before his death to undo the spirit of the Partition by creating an Indo-Pakistan confederation. In 1959 President Ayub Khan offered joint defence that would have automatically led to a confederation. But the same President Ayub Khan rejected Nehru’s proposal of a confederation presented by Sheikh Abdullah which Jinnah had accepted at the time of the Cabinet Mission Plan. In other words, both India and Pakistan had wanted confederation. But they had wanted it at different times. Therefore they cannot agree. Is this not shocking diplomacy? The absence of statesmanship displayed by leaders of both governments and their readiness to serve foreign interests could not be more glaring.

The latest revelations by the Indian government and General VK Singh have made prospects of reconciliation ever more remote. Peace will come only if the leaders of India and Pakistan are bold enough to cut the Gordian knot and make a dramatic breakthrough. Critics have opposed the proposed meeting between the Prime Ministers of India and Pakistan scheduled for September 29 in New York. BJP leader and former foreign minister Mr. Yashwant Sinha has stated that such a meeting is premature as long as terrorism continues. He suggested that lower officials should first meet. One begs to differ. Even if lower officials meet and people to people contacts continue for a hundred years there will be no progress.

The problem is the trust deficit. That exists between governments and not between peoples. That exists because the armies of both nations are in contention. Only joint defence and operations to wipe out terrorism from the region will remove the trust deficit. There are more victims of terrorism in Pakistan than in India. Prime Minister Mr. Manmohan Singh should bluntly tell Mr. Nawaz Sharif on September 29 that enough is enough. Unless the armies of both nations cooperate there cannot be peace and stability in the region. If even now, when both nations are besieged by terrorism and instability, their governments cannot act rationally, they never will. Without joint defence the trust deficit cannot be removed. If there is joint defence it must inevitably lead to some form of confederation. Both leaders should read the writing on the wall. They should forget what their critics might say today. They should focus on what historians will say tomorrow.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Politicians, Army, playing with fire! Sep

25

      1 Vote

General VK Singh reportedly has decided to file an application with the Right to Information (RTI) commission seeking a copy of General Vinod Bhatia’s secret report on the alleged misuse of the top secret Technical Support Division (TSD) during his tenure as Army Chief. Will the government respond by releasing the secret report? After news of the report appeared in the media the government stated that the report “impinges on matters of national security and, as such, the government will take a decision and further actions after careful examination.” If the contents of the report impinge on national security it is difficult to see how the government can agree to release the report.

However, then a further question is raised. If the report will not be released to the public how was it allowed to be leaked to the media? After the media exposure the government did not deny the report or displayed reticence but went out of its way to acknowledge its contents and resolved to probe the affair. One spokesperson of the Congress party blithely informed TV that since the media had obtained the report the matter had to be fully probed. But the government has not addressed the obvious question of how the media obtained the report. From all accounts it has not ordered an inquiry into who leaked the report and taken steps to punish the guilty. The circumstantial evidence of the government itself leaking the report is compelling. In the pursuit of petty partisan politics was the government oblivious of the grave implications that might flow from the leakage?

That is not all. Politicians further endangered the situation. BJP President Mr. Rajnath Singh defended General VK Singh and charged the UPA government with targeting him because he shared a platform with Mr. Narendra Modi. The Punjab Congress was quick to retaliate. Captain Amarinder Singh reiterated the allegation in the report that General VK Singh had misused TSD to attempt scuttling the appointment of the current Army Chief General Bikram Singh. He challenged Punjab Chief Minister Mr. Prakash Singh Badal to clarify his stand since he was supporting the BJP and Mr. Narendra Modi.

Have India ’s politicians gone stark raving mad? In the pursuit of their stupid and petty rivalries they are creating a situation that could encourage polarization between Hindu and Sikh, between Haryana and Punjab . Whatever the truth of real or imagined differences between army generals, these might be based upon entirely professional grounds. But in public perception the differences could most likely be seen as between communities and states. If such perception is allowed to grow, how will it affect all the ranks in the army?

The TSD unit was conceived and created after the 26/11 terrorist attack in Mumbai. The purpose of this top secret unit was to counter terrorism. Now not only the existence of this top secret unit is blown, but efforts are actually being made to reveal its operations and functioning in order to settle political scores. The most far reaching consequences of this sorry episode might well be General VK Singh rebuttal of the allegations against him publicized by the government. In an interview to Times Now TV channel he furnished damaging details of how the army has been operating in Jammu and Kashmir for the past many decades. His revelations make mockery of India ’s official stand on Kashmir.

One can imagine how gleefully members of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) in China and the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) in Pakistan would be with rapt attention watching the unfolding exposure of the functioning of India’s top secret army unit established to counter terrorism.

Share this:

1 Comment

Posted in Nation

Has Government committed treason? Sep

22

      2 Votes

Not surprisingly the controversy created by the media exposure and its subsequent official confirmation of the alleged misuse of the Technical Services Division (TSD) by former Army Chief General VK Singh is expected to snowball into a major national crisis. But the crisis may not evolve as those who leaked the information might imagine. According to The Indian Express that published the report General Singh had conveyed a warning that if they went ahead and published it “they will get it in the neck”. General Singh reportedly told the Press Trust of India (PTI) news agency that anyone recommending a probe into the functioning of TSD was being nonsensical because its operations were meant to be secret.

General Singh might have enlightened the public a little more. The mere fact that the inquiry into the functioning of TSD was “secret” suggests that the TSD operation was not only secret but probably “top secret”. If that is the case the consequences for the government as well as for media outlets utilized by the government could be very serious. In that event even the existence of TSD should never have been publicized. Further, if there is exposure of the actual working of the top secret unit, leaking information about it may well be considered treasonable under law, regardless of whether infromation is true or false. It involves national security. Such information can help the nation’s enemies. Even knowledge of the existence of TSD can help the nation’s enemies.

Did the government factor this aspect into its calculations before rushing to the media with its leaks? The last on this issue has not been heard. Events thus far may be in fact just the start of a crisis that could traumatize the system.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

President, army and governance! Sep

21

      1 Vote

According to media reports the Defence Ministry constituted a secret Board of Officers body headed by Lt General Vinod Bhatia to probe alleged irregularities committed during the tenure of former Army Chief General VK Singh. It is alleged that General Singh set up a controversial Military Intelligence unit, Technical Services Division (TSD) that misused secret funds to conduct unauthorized covert operations that interfered in domestic politics. According to reports General Bhatia has advised a fuller probe by an external agency like the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The report alleges that TDS misused secret funds in an effort to destabilize the Jammu and Kashmir government, as well as block the promotion of the present Army Chief General Bikram Singh. The media report has furnished details about how these irregularities were sought to be accomplished.

This report was played up as a first page banner in The Indian Express, and appeared as an unobtrusive single column in the inside pages of The Times of India. The Express claims that it tried unsuccessfully to contact General VK Singh but managed to interact through a mutual contact that quoted the General to say that the report was rubbish and the government was motivated by the fact that he had shared a public platform with opposition leader Mr. Narendra Modi. General Bhatia had submitted his report to the Defence Ministry in March this year. This is an amazing episode and offers glaring evidence of how deeply governance and responsibility to preserve national security have sunk. The following questions need to be addressed.

First, now that the report has been quoted in the media it has to be established whether the allegations leveled by General Bhatia’s team of officers are valid. If true it reveals a shocking state of affairs in which a serving Army Chief can so misuse his powers to further political ends unconnected to his call of duty. If untrue, it reveals an equally shocking state of affairs in which politics has infected the armed forces to allow such false and motivated allegations to be made in order to settle differences within the Defence Ministry. Secondly, the report was submitted in March. Why has it surfaced only now almost six months later after the Defence Minister reportedly has got into the act? Does this validate General Singh’s reported comment that he is being targeted only because he shared a public platform with Mr. Narendra Modi? Thirdly, if it be assumed that the report has substance surely there are various discreet methods of addressing the issue, of even indirectly punishing the guilty, and keep the controversy away from public attention?

Transparency in governance is an excellent principle and the media cannot be criticized for playing up the report when offered the chance. But does it behoove a government to throw all considerations of national security to the winds and jeopardize it by publicizing such an episode if indeed it occurred as alleged? What kind of government is ruling India , and what kind of priorities does it have?

Finally, one cannot but reflect once again whether there can ever be accountability in our collapsing democracy unless the President discharges the responsibilities assigned to his post by our Constitution. It is weeks since communal riots exposed the failure of law and order in Uttar Pradesh. Every single party spokesperson has demanded that the government be dismissed. Official spokespersons of the Congress have said that law and order has collapsed. Yet the central government remains a mute spectator although it claims that the rule of law has collapsed in the state. Neither the Prime Minister nor the President has taken a single tiny step to introduce Governor’s rule. The latest episode related to the TSD report has grave implications for the state of affairs in our armed forces as well as for national security. The President as the Supreme Commander of the armed forces is directly responsible to safeguard both. Will he still remain mute?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Modi’s poll campaign error! Sep

19

      Rate This

From all accounts Mr. Narendra Modi’s inaugural campaign rally in Rewari after being anointed Prime Ministerial candidate of the BJP was the largest ever seen in the district. In some of his earlier rallies also common people had flocked to his meetings with great enthusiasm. Obviously, in addition to the formidable publicity and mobilization organized by the RSS and powerful business interests supporting Mr. Modi, certain qualities of his persona too have caught the imagination of the masses. This has been seized by political analysts and his party’s leaders to describe Mr. Modi as the first great national Other Backward Classes (OBC) leader who might become Prime Minister. Media analysts may be forgiven for their ignorance of political ground realities to describe Mr. Modi as a national OBC leader. But surely the poll managers of the BJP ought to have known better?

It is a grievous flaw to describe Mr. Modi as a national OBC icon. Not only are BJP leaders assiduously promoting this image, even Mr. Modi himself seems to have become victim of this flawed propaganda. Mr. Modi belongs to the Ghanchi caste found only in the state of Gujarat . It is a sub-caste in the OBC category. People belonging to the Teli caste in other states may empathize with the Ghanchi caste because of a shared occupational history related to extraction of oil. Otherwise the Ghanchi caste will have little relevance outside Gujarat . Belonging to the Ghanchi caste makes Mr. Modi an OBC leader. It does not make him a national icon of OBC voters. There is no national OBC icon. There cannot be a national OBC icon. There can only be a national icon who is an OBC. The distinction should be appreciated.

The very logic of caste identity runs counter to a nationwide OBC identity. Caste mobilization becomes easy precisely because the approach is tribal. Caste leaders often unite to make common cause. That makes it easy and convenient for the big business corporate sector to use money power to split or align political forces to suit their interest. But when have castes en block voted for a leader belonging to another caste because of his OBC status? Why do not the Kurmis in Bihar vote for Mr. Laloo Yadav, or the Yadavs vote for Mr. Nitish Kumar? Before Mr. Modi became his party’s election campaign chief the BJP had already laid the ground for positive poll results in UP after Mr. Rajnath Singh brought back Mr. Kalyan Singh into his party’s fold. The revived Thakur-Kurmi alliance had earlier brought the BJP its largest ever parliamentry tally of 57 MPs. With Miss Uma Bharati entering UP politics, in addition to her oratory expected to consolidate the Hindutva vote bank, she will also undoubtedly attract Lodh voters belonging to her caste.

Yet media analysts and BJP poll managers are busy trying to exploit Mr. Modi’s OBC status to project him as the first great OBC national leader who might become Prime Minister. Unfortunately, Mr. Modi has bought this flawed approach. Celebrating his birthday recently in Gujarat Mr. Modi reached out and invited many OBC leaders of the organized and unorganized sectors to his function. National thinking has become so corrupted and distorted by the caste reservation policy and mobilization of quick vote banks that an obvious truth escaped media analysts as well as the poll campaign managers of the BJP. If enthusiastic masses have flocked to Mr. Modi’s rallies it is not because he is a national OBC icon. It is because people have recognized that Mr. Modi has risen from very humble origins like themselves to acquire a national political status. If the masses empathize with Mr. Modi it is not because he is an OBC but because he was poor and is now powerful.

The flawed approach adopted by Mr. Modi and the BJP regarding the importance of his OBC status can have very far reaching consequences. It will determine what kind of Indian will emerge tomorrow if Mr. Modi does become Prime Minister. On his birthday Mr. Modi invited OBC leaders belonging to the organized and unorganized sectors of labour. OBC leaders can mobilize votes. That is an understandably attractive attribute. But so can union leaders of organized and unorganized labour mobilize voters. Why could not Mr. Modi have focused on them instead? Does Mr. Modi seek an India of his dreams symbolized by his proposed Statue of Unity to consolidate on the prevalent national divisive culture based upon over 4000 contending castes battling for economic crumbs?

Or does he seek to create a new Indian with a national identity above caste and community ready to confront the 21st century world? Will he support caste-based reservation or economic criteria for job and educational reservation? Will he promote universal compulsory primary education to lift all castes from poverty? These are some questions that Mr. Modi and the leaders of the BJP need to ponder if they seek a genuine political change. They have to decide whether they want victory in the present or a victory for the future. Do they want to cater to India of the present or to India of the future that will belong to the young?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Modi’s proposed Statue of Unity! Sep

17

      1 Vote

Concluding his first public rally in Rewari after being anointed Prime Ministerial candidate of the BJP, Mr. Narendra Modi appealed to his audience to donate pieces of iron from each village in the state to be used for constructing his proposed Statue of Unity on the sea coast of Gujarat . Mr. Modi wants similar donations of iron pieces from each village in each state across the nation in honour of Sardar Vallabhai Patel who will symbolize unity in the proposed statue. Mr. Modi has declared his intention of constructing the tallest statue in the world, taller than America ’s Statue of Liberty, in honour of Sardar Patel.

This writer has serious objection to the proposal. Sardar Patel was undoubtedly a very great man, as were Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru. Patel performed great service to the nation by unifying the princely states of India after Independence . But though these great leaders did great things for the nation they also committed unforgivable errors the consequence of which continue to haunt our nation. These leaders, mainly Sardar Patel, united Bharat but they divided India . They divided India without the slightest justification. They divided India because they allowed themselves to be influenced and manipulated by the British.

With just over 1000 people killed in Punjab through communal riots engineered by the British administration immediately after Lord Mountbatten became India ’s Viceroy, and about 12000 killed in Bihar and Bengal over a period of two years, these leaders violated their solemn pledge to the people of India by accepting Partition. Gandhi on the fateful day, June 3, 1947 when the Congress formally accepted Partition, conveniently observed his ‘day of silence’. Nehru and Patel were the hawks in the Congress Working Committee in favour of accepting Partition. JB Kripalani, Jayaprakash Narain and Ram Manohar Lohia who opposed Partition were overruled by the rest. On June 2, on eve of the decision, Gandhi assured Mountbatten who visited him that he would not create any hurdles against the decision.

In what manner then might Sardar Patel symbolize unity? After two lawyers from Gujarat, Gandhi and Jinnah, and two aristocrats from Uttar Pradesh, Nehru and Liaquat Ali, butchered and cut asunder Punjab and Bengal displaying their ignorance about the ground realities in these states, people today should display some sensitivity towards the sentiments of provinces where over a million people were slaughtered and over ten million rendered homeless due to the follies of these leaders. In case critics challenge this view about the unforgivable decision about the Partition, let them note that both Gandhi and Nehru acknowledged their error. Gandhi wanted to settle down in Pakistan to undo the Partition just before he was assassinated thanks to ignored security measures during Sardar Patel’s tenure as Home Minister. Nehru sent Sheikh Abdullah to Pakistan to plead with President Ayub Khan to reunite India and Pakistan through a proposed confederation during which effort he died.

Therefore this writer would like to remind Mr. Narendra Modi and many others from different parts of India that they may have their history and may choose to honour whom they wish. The peoples of Punjab and Bengal have their own history and their own memories to recall. Congress leaders today may be the best in the land. They are welcome to govern India . But the Congress Party as Imperial Britain’s instrument to partition India deserves to be buried. Let Congress leaders reinvent themselves into a new organization. After all, this demand merely echoes the last wish of the most revered Congress icon, Mahatma Gandhi, on the day before he died.

Mr. Modi is welcome to construct his Statue of Unity. The people of Punjab and Bengal might seek their own way of responding to history. Human folly can delay but not derail history. Ultimately, cultural nationalism will triumph.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Profit & Loss of UP riots! Sep

14

      Rate This

All political parties and media outlets seem agreed that the recent Muzzafarnagar riots which cost 40 lives and brought untold misery to thousands who fled their homes, were the result of a conspiracy. But all seem to disagree about who was behind the conspiracy. The UP government was suspiciously lax in acting on warnings issued by the central government months earlier. Inexplicably it allowed a Jat mahapanchayat of 1.5 lakh people just 20 km from Muzaffarnagar in violation of prohibitory orders in force in the entire district due to prevailing tension. Thousands of vehicles and tractors from Haryana, Delhi and the neighbouring districts of UP were allowed to descend on the venue of the mahapanchayat. One UP minister has acknowledged that there was an administrative lapse. Samajwadi Party (SP) leader Mr. Mulayam Singh was at pains to stress that the riots were not communal but ethnic – between Jats and Muslims. Chief Minister Mr. Akhilesh Yadav has accused other political parties for the conspiracy.

The UP administration has charged that a five minute fake video was used to fan violence. One BJP leader has been arrested in connection with that video. The district administration of Muzafarnagar lodged criminal cases against a senior BJP leader and former minister along with three other BJP leaders for violating the prohibitory order and allegedly delivered provocative speeches during the Jat mahapanchayat. The BJP leaders have denied charges. Leaders of the Bharat Kisan Union (BKU) and the Congress were also charged on similar grounds. Allegations and counter allegations of conspiracy to instigate the riots flew thick and fast between the BJP, SP, Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) and Congress. However, it is futile to speculate who was behind the conspiracy. It is futile to speculate that if there was indeed a conspiracy, whether it was the work of individual politicians or was it sanctioned by their respective political organizations. What can be assessed with some accuracy is the political impact of riots. Which party gained, and which party lost?

The SP is a huge loser. It is likely to lose its Muslim vote which is vital for its electoral success. Had Muzzafarnagar limited itself to communal tension the SP would have gained. That explains the seemingly deliberate administrative dereliction of duty. The Muslims of West UP who supported Mr. Ajit Singh’s Rashtriya Lok DaL (RLD) might have been weaned away to support SP. But things got out of hand. The Jat mahapanchayat was followed by horrendous riots. The government’s failure has left the Muslim community bitter and alienated.

The BSP could be a gainer. The first Muslim priority as of present is to remove this government. In the assembly elections the BSP offers the best chance of doing it. Similarly the Congress could be a gainer. For parliamentary elections the Muslim vote will attempt to block the BJP. On present reckoning the Congress provides the only hope of accomplishing that.

The BJP is the biggest gainer. Notwithstanding Mr. Mulayam Singh’s nitpicking distinction between communal riots and ethnic riots, the accession of the Jat vote to the BJP, along with widespread communal polarization following the riots across the state, could provide a huge boost to BJP prospects.

The RLD is the biggest loser. The traditional harmony between Muslims and Jats carefully nurtured by the late Choudhary Charan Singh rendered West UP a solid base for the RLD. That harmony has been shattered. The cost of this division will be very heavy. It could destroy the dream of carving a new state of Harit Pradesh in West UP. Both the Jats and the Muslims yearned for it. The Muslims are one third of the population in the region. The Deoband centre of religious learning is in the region. The destruction of the fine balance between Jats and Muslims may be irreparable for a long time. Both communities may now repent at leisure.

It is in this cynical way that politicians will calculate the outcome of the Muzzafarnagar riots. They will not spare a thought for the heartrending tragedy befallen to innocent women and children. Their crime was that they belonged to a community. Their weakness was that they were poor. Their tragedy was that they lived in a country where politics is conducted by a cynical, cruel and corrupt class of leaders.

Share this:

1 Comment

Posted in Nation

Modified Modi! Sep

12

      2 Votes

According to media reports the BJP will formally anoint Mr. Narendra Modi as its Prime Ministerial candidate when the party’s parliamentary board meeting is held on Friday. Some time earlier the view had been expressed in these columns that there was no substantive difference between Prime Minister Mr. Manmohan Singh and Mr. Narendra Modi insofar as approach to economic policy was concerned. Both leaders seem to be focused mainly on quick growth based upon foreign investment and delivery of maximum facilities to the big corporate sector.

However, this writer deemed Mr. Modi superior because he was described as a “muscular” version of the Prime Minister. In Gujarat he offered quicker and smoother delivery to big business than the Prime Minister could at the centre. The reason was simple. There was no extra constitutional authority to derail and slow down Mr. Modi in Gujarat as the office of the National Advisory Council did to the Prime Minister in Delhi . The Prime Minister was helpless. He was appointed by Mrs. Sonia Gandhi and had to function under her direction. It was thought that Mr. Modi would have no such fetters to implement the economic model in which the Prime Minister reposed his faith. That view it seems was too hasty. Mr. Modi may in fact be no more muscular than the Prime Minister.

Recent events should leave no doubt that if Mr. Modi is declared as the BJP’s Prime Ministerial candidate it will be only due to the pressure exerted by the RSS on the party. The RSS has appointed Mr. Modi as the party’s Prime Ministerial candidate and left it to the party to announce the decision. Mr. Modi cannot be unaware of the crucial RSS support needed for his elevation. The support reportedly was promised after extended parleys and eventually the decision was taken after agreement was reached on the minimum demands conveyed by the RSS. According to media reports the four conditions set by the RSS for Mr. Modi to receive support were to pledge building a grand Ram Temple in Ayodhya, to enforce the contentious Uniform Civil Code across the country, to repeal of Article 370 in J&K and end the special status of the state, and to press for full protection of cows. All four conditions reflect policies of traditional Hindutva.

However, the merits or otherwise of the policies insisted upon by the RSS are not important. What is significant is that the RSS is insistent upon the implementation of its agenda. Like Mrs. Sonia Gandhi choosing Mr. Manmohan Singh as Prime Minister, the RSS has chosen Mr. Modi as its candidate. But unlike Mrs. Gandhi who established her National Advisory Council to offer policy directives to the government after Mr. Manmohan Singh assumed office, Mr. Mohan Bhagwat has not wasted time. He has already laid down the minimum policy agenda. This is just the start.

Many more policy directives should be expected if Mr. Modi does indeed become Prime Minister. Although Mr. Modi therefore may not prove to be a more muscular version of Mr. Manmohan Singh, constrained as he will be by an extra constitutional body, Mr. Mohan Bhagwat certainly is showing signs of being a much more muscular version of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi. This aspect needs to be considered carefully by all the supporters of Mr. Modi. It should be amply clear that apart from support by members of the public Mr. Modi is heavily backed by the most powerful big business corporate sector. Apart from Mr. Modi’s own undoubted attributes, his popularity depends heavily on the massive support rendered to him by the big business electronic media. There is nothing surprising about that. Big business will protect its own interests. But a serious question arises.

Many supporters of Mr. Modi draw comfort from the fact that he has not personally referred to any of the pro-Hindu policies associated with the hardcore Hindutva elements of the RSS. These supporters are being delusional. They betray their ignorance about how politics is played out. The approval of every action and every statement by any of the sources in the BJP will devolve on Mr. Modi as the election campaign in charge. His silence is meaningless. Silence will be taken as assent. If Mr. Modi disapproves of any policy or statement by members of his party he will have to contradict them publicly to record his dissent. Voters are influenced by whole parties and not by their perception of any one individual, however powerful or charismatic.

What should be clear therefore to all supporters of Mr. Modi, especially the powerful big business elements, is that the RSS agenda must be factored in their calculations. This is because Mr. Modi and RSS will be inseparable if he becomes the Prime Minister. There will be nothing wrong with that if Mr. Modi and the RSS see eye to eye on all policy matters. If on the other hand Mr. Modi’s personal predilection is at variance from the RSS, there could be a very serious problem. In that event Mr. Modi’s government could become as paralyzed as Mr. Manmohan Singh’s government. There would be precisely the same kind of diarchy in governance as paralyzed the UPA government. The paralysis in the UPA government became so palpable that even Congress General Secretary Mr. Digvijay Singh was constrained to acknowledge publicly that the existing system of diarchy was undesirable.

The powerful vested interests favouring Mr. Modi should therefore carefully scrutinize the total RSS agenda in order to continue their support. This applies to all the international big business executives who descended from Europe and South America to endorse Mr. Modi, to all the young Indians who seek a modern twenty-first century nation and look up to Mr. Modi, to all the biggest business houses in the nation who are solidly backing Mr. Modi, and to all the mainstream media TV anchors who swoon with excitement each time Mr. Modi sneezes. It is entirely possible of course that the RSS policies may exceed their wildest dreams of promoting economic growth and progress in India . But that is a prospect it would be more prudent for them to assess now instead of later. What needs to be understood is that either Mr. Modi is totally supportive of RSS policies, or if he is not, there are prospects once again of paralyzing diarchy that could ruin governance in India.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Post navigation← Older posts

Media’s response to Pak Envoy! Oct

9

      1 Vote

During a press interview to a foreign journalist President Pranab Mukherjee said that even if cross border terrorism was perpetrated by non-state actors as Islamabad claimed, the Pakistan government could not evade responsibility. The territory was under the jurisdiction of the government, the President pointed out. “Non-state actors do not descend from heaven,

” he said. This view was echoed by Information and Broadcasting (I&B) Minister Mr. Manish Tewari who told media that the crossing over by terrorists and non-state actors suggested either complicity or negligence by the Pakistan government. “Obviously these terrorists or non-state actors are not coming out of a vacuum,”

he said.

The Pakistan High Commissioner to India Mr. Salman Bashir gave a veiled rejoinder to these remarks. But he focused his criticism mainly against the media. He accused the media of focusing exclusively on “so-called” incursions and infiltrations from across the border.

He said:

“Whoever is making the argument that they have not descended from heaven, I want to ask who are these thousands of people who are involved in heinous acts of terrorism in Pakistan . Have they descended from heaven? We agree they have not descended from heaven, from where are they being funded and sourced?”

One can appreciate the constraints under which Pakistan ’s official envoy to India has to function. Mr. Bashir said something, and he implied something. Both his assertion and implication deserve attention. Since he thought it fit to direct his ire against the Indian media this writer takes the liberty of directly responding to his criticism.

Mr. Bashir cannot blame the Indian media of responding to continued incursions from across the border which for diplomatic compulsions he described as “so-called”. But he was right to point out the failure of the Indian government as well as the media to adequately differentiate between the government and non-state actors in Pakistan . Mr. Bashir has rightly asserted that “thousands of terrorists” are operating against Pakistan who obviously did not descend from heaven. By implication this is tacit admission of failure of the Pakistan government. It is a fact that there are substantially more victims of terrorism in Pakistan than in India including in the state of J&K. Then Mr. Bashir went on to question the source of funding and training of these terrorists. His central plea was for the enhancement of cooperation between Islamabad and New Delhi.

He said:

“We have evidence which we have shared and are prepared to share with the rest of the world and particularly with the government of India on fuelling of acts of terrorism in Pakistan .”

Mr. Bashir’s plea for greater cooperation between India and Pakistan to fight terror clearly indicates that by questioning the source of terror funding he was not pointing a finger at India . He was obviously indicating the hand of Al Qaeda which inspires global terrorism. In the light of the reality of terrorist activity in Pakistan funded and directed by global forces the Indian government is clearly remiss in not taking an initiative for closer cooperation with Pakistan to combat terror. New Delhi ’s inhibition may be explained by its continued doubts about how deeply subverted Pakistan ’s security establishment is by pro-terror elements. Well, the Indian media has no such inhibitions. Since Mr. Bashir squarely blamed the Indian media I take the liberty of directly addressing him. I put a question to the Pakistan government through him that the Indian government has failed to do.

Mr. Bashir you seek closer cooperation between India and Pakistan , you admit that there are thousands of terrorists operating inside Pakistan . You indicate that they are funded and directed from abroad. You tacitly imply though you do not state that they cannot operate without help from a section of the official machinery. I agree with your overall analysis. My question is: Will the Pakistan government accept an offer of joint intelligence and joint operations against terror to wipe out these non-state actors from both our countries?

I know that you may not deign to respond to such a question from a mere media person instead of from the government. But let me assure you. If you do answer the media will compel the Indian government to respond appropriately.

So will you respond?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

The President’s curious priorities! Oct

8

      1 Vote

After the media pointed out that the credit for the rollback of the Ordinance on convicted MPs went to President Pranab Mukherjee and not to Congress Vice-President Rahul Gandhi who exploited the President’s known reluctance to sign it, Mr. LK Advani praised the President for his decision. However, the President reacted to this praise most curiously. The President with uncalled for modesty went out of his way to dissociate himself from the decision to roll back the Ordinance. It is known that he sat over the Ordinance and was reluctant to sign it. By signing it he could have possibly attracted strictures from the Supreme Court to make his position untenable. Understandably he mulled over the matter and shared his views with UPA Ministers who called on him to discuss the Ordinance. It was after that when Mr. Rahul Gandhi jumped into the controversy to corner credit. Mr. Advani’s praise for the President therefore was a routine and unexceptionable observation.

However the President reacted to the media in response to such praise by saying:

“I cannot comment on what the Opposition has said about my role. My duties are now completely determined by the Indian Constitution.”

The praise for the President was precisely because he did follow the Constitution by not immediately signing the Ordinance. Why, then, his curiously defensive rejoinder? Eyebrows were further raised after the President’s son, Mr. Abhijeet Mukherjee, called on the chief victim of the scrapped Ordinance, Mr. Lalu Prasad Yadav, who was in jail. The popular conclusion derived from this visit was that Mr. Mukherjee had gone there to convince Mr. Yadav that the decision not to sign the Ordinance reflected no personal motive of the President but was dictated by the Constitution. This was unnecessary. Mr. Yadav one is sure is sufficiently knowledgeable to have been aware of that. If such speculation has any basis it is certainly odd that the President should be so concerned about Mr. Yadav’s feelings. The President after all is above party politics.

Alas, it does not seem that the President is as much above party politics as he should be. His continued silence over the horrendous events in Andhra is equally mystifying. After the Union government hastily declared the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh by ceding the new state of Telangana despite the state assembly being overwhelmingly opposed to the measure, the entire state is in flames. Apart from mammoth public protest and indefinite fasts launched by politicians, the whole state is without electric power because of a strike by workers. And this situation has been growing and worsening for days. Has not the Constitutional machinery in the state collapsed to necessitate the application of Article 356 to impose President’s rule in Andhra to restore order? But the Prime Minister and the Union cabinet are mute.

Surprisingly, even the President is silent. Article 78 (b) of the Constitution states: “It shall be the duty of the Prime Minister to furnish such information relating to the administration of the affairs of the Union and proposals for legislation as the President may call for.” Should not the President invoke this Article and initiate action? Surely the millions of agitated people in Andhra Pradesh deserve as much attention as Mr. Lalu Yadav should get?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Snooping, security and privacy! Oct

5

      1 Vote

After Julian Assange and the Wikileaks controversy it is the Edgar Snowden affair that has rocked the world. Snowden was a government contractor working at the National Security Agency (NSA) in America. The NSA in order to protect the US snoops on citizens in America and abroad looking for terrorist connections. The NSA collects and analyses foreign communication and foreign signals of intelligence in order to protect the US. In an interview in Hong Kong Snowden leaked top-secret government surveillance programs that led to an international debate over national security versus individual privacy. In a recent statement to the European Parliament Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Snowden said:

“A culture of secrecy has denied our societies the opportunity to determine the appropriate balance between the human right of privacy and the governmental interest in investigation.”

Among Snowden’s leaks was information about secret US surveillance of foreign governments including Brazil and India. The Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff in protest lashed out at the US in the UN General Assembly and canceled her official visit to Washington. Critics in India not only criticized the US but berated the Indian government after disclosures that it had also like America and China snooped on citizens.

Whatever the extent of public outrage over official snooping, it will not and cannot stop. The world needs a reality check. As long as terrorism survives in the world and weapons of mass destruction can be manufactured by private citizens in a garage, surveillance is a survival imperative for governments. What is required is that such surveillance by all governments be monitored and controlled by the UN.

Technology has not only enabled private citizens to manufacture weapons of mass destruction, but also to snoop on governments and citizens alike. In the foreseeable future therefore privacy cannot be guaranteed for any citizen or government. In the event is it not prudent for people to adjust to the new reality? In other words technology will render total transparency for governments and private citizens unavoidable. It will signify a game changing new culture for mankind. Should not people therefore start adjusting to this change and make their lives totally transparent? It may lead to a happier and safer world.

Indeed, there could well be advantages in being snooped upon! While many people criticize the government’s snooping policy, so do I but for different reasons. My complaint is that the government does not bug my telephone, hack my computer or bug my regular haunts where I have coffee sessions with friends. I want to be heard but nobody listens. Does the government think that it is only the rich and the powerful that can provide useful information?

So can ordinary people like this writer. The government should bug ordinary people too in order to create a level playing field. Not only Neera Radia and Amar Singh are worth snooping on. People like me too have valuable ideas that would help the government. Alas! All my ideas and the pearls of wisdom exchanged with friends go waste because the government does not snoop on me. If the government were to do so would not some of that wisdom penetrate the dense minds of our rulers to improve governance and conditions in our nation?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Politics of convicted MPs! Oct

3

      1 Vote

The current controversy over the Supreme Court (SC) judgment and the government’s Ordinance on the continuance of convicted MPs in legislatures needs to be appreciated in its proper perspective. Right now corruption is a very emotive issue. The public not surprisingly has jumped to the conclusion that the Ordinance which sought to overrule the SC judgment was part of political chicanery. But to what extent does the SC judgment or for that matter the Ordinance actually affect the prevalence of corruption in the system? Is everybody in the government, parliament and judiciary missing the wood for the trees?

The existing Representation of Peoples (RP) Act was challenged by two writ petitions filed by advocate Lily Thomas and Lok Prahari, through its General Secretary S. N. Shukla. The petitioners questioned the legality of MPs continuing in parliament despite conviction by obtaining a stay order and further hearing from a higher court. The SC considered the RP Act unconstitutional and ruled that immediately after conviction the MP with a sentence of two or more years.must be disqualified. The Union cabinet drafted an ordinance to neutralize the Supreme Court’s order mandating immediate disqualification. The government held that if the conviction was stayed by the higher court within 90 days the elected representative should not be disqualified. But the government in its ordinance denied the convicted MP perks and voting rights till being cleared by a higher court. Only, the MP’s seat would remain occupied and there would be no by-election.

Recognizing ground realities the government considered the ease with which motivated and fraudulent prosecution and conviction could be secured from lower courts to harm even innocent politicians. Law Minister Kapil Sibal said that “everybody knows the judicial system has miserably failed to save itself from corruption charges and nepotism”. Even though the Ordinance remedy may be flawed the truth of judicial corruption cannot be denied and has indeed been voiced by Supreme Court judges and reputed jurists.

The media has gone to town attributing Rahul Gandhi’s outburst against the Ordinance as the trigger to clean up the system and check corruption and criminalization. The reality is of course that it was the President’s doubts about the legality of the Ordinance conveyed to cabinet ministers that was seized by the Congress party to enact Rahul Gandhi’s drama in order to obtain credit. The entire issue is being projected by the media and perhaps being swallowed by the public as a great fight against corruption launched by the Congress inspired by Rahul Gandhi. This is laughable. The politicians, the judiciary and the media are living in world of make believe. Consider the reality.

Two MPs, Lalu Yadav and Rashid Masood have been unseated in parliament after being convicted in corruption cases. Their corruption was committed decades ago. Lalu Yadav has been convicted after 17 years and Masood has been convicted after 23 years of their misdemeanors. Even if neither was a sitting MP both would have enjoyed three of four terms of being in parliament before this recent conviction. What kind of fight against corruption and cleansing of parliament is that? Currently there would be a dozen leading MPs involved in corruption during the Commonwealth Games and other mega scams under investigation and facing court proceedings. Will they be unseated after remaining in parliament for the next several terms and being convicted after a few decades?

The prime need is to make mandatory the completion of all court cases within six months so that speedy justice can punish the guilty. That calls for serious judicial reform. Instead of addressing that the obsession with legal nitpicking related to the RP Act through Supreme Court rulings and government Ordinances is meaningless and irrelevant. It is designed only to deceive the public into believing that corruption is genuinely being fought.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

PM’s US trip succeeds despite sabotage! Oct

1

      1 Vote

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to America has been as successful as could be reasonably expected. It was a crucial trip during which the PM met President Obama, Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and heads of other SAARC nations. In his meeting with President Obama a game changing breakthrough was achieved not sufficiently appreciated by analysts. America and India have agreed to become closest partners for defence cooperation. For transfer of defence technology India ’s relations with the US are now at par with Britain.

This is what Pandit Nehru sought from President Kennedy after the Sino-Indian conflict of 1962 when the latter’s death aborted the effort. This is what President Bush sought when he signed the nuclear deal but that effort failed because the Indian government scared of domestic criticism failed to deliver. Now agreement has been reached. The first sign of change is evident from India ’s consent to participate in joint naval exercises in the world’s largest maritime exercise involving dozens of countries. China is not invited to the exercise and the People’s Liberation Army has expressed strong opposition to it. Regardless of the PM’s future the Indo-US deal has been signed. It is likely to endure because it is not between political parties but between governments.

The PM’s meeting with his Pakistani counterpart was as crucial. Though no breakthrough was achieved or attempted the ice was broken. Contrary to the expectations of sceptics the PM addressed India ’s immediate concerns about border violations and terror camps. Mr. Sharif did acknowledge those concerns and promised action to stabilize the border. After he delivers some results the PMs will meet to carry the dialogue further. Already undated invitations for such meeting have been extended. If the PM achieved a big step forward towards the US , he also managed a baby half-step towards Pakistan . Now it remains to be seen how the agreements of this visit actually translate into results.

Anyone following the run-up to the Prime Minister’s visit would marvel at the number of glitches that suddenly erupted to mar its prospects. And for each manufactured event to scuttle progress in the talks the media played its part by a hysterical negative approach to the visit. The opposition parties by their strident criticism of the PM while he was abroad, throwing all accepted diplomatic norms to the winds, also played its part. It is a well established norm that opposition parties do not attack a head of state when he is abroad or when opposition leaders themselves are abroad. This is what democratic bipartisan approach to foreign policy denotes. But the BJP launched a shrill attack against the PM demanding an explanation while he was in the US.

The rot started with Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi. He enacted a preplanned unprecedented theatrical performance to rubbish the PM just hours before he was scheduled to meet President Obama. This demeaned the PM in the eyes of the opposition and demands for his resignation were voiced. It is a reflection of our sick state of politics that even the PM’s former press Advisor Mr. Sanjay Baru was swept along the popular current to advise the PM to resign. It is amazing that not a single voice within or outside the Congress party has made the obvious democratic demand. After the intemperate, ill-timed and irresponsible statement by the ruling party’s vice-president to damage prospects of international negotiations, it is Rahul Gandhi who should be sacked from his post if he does not voluntarily resign.

Why should the PM be asked to quit?

Narendra Modi in a public rally in Delhi lashed out at Gandhi. But he was equally amiss himself. In his speech he sought to damage the PM’s foreign visit by uttering two falsehoods. The first was that the PM had allegedly lamented to Obama that India was a very poor nation in need of help. From where did Modi get his information?

From all accounts the PM discussed terrorism and not India ’s poverty. The second falsehood was even more intriguing. Based upon a TV quote by a noted Pakistani journalist Modi attempted to further muddy the atmosphere just hours before the PM and Nawaz Sharif were to meet. He quoted Pakistani anchor of Geo TV, Hamid Mir, who alleged on TV that Nawaz Sharif had described the PM as a “village woman” pleading before the US President. This was supposed to be said over a breakfast interview given by Sharif to two other journalists and Mir. The two other journalists, Barkha Dutt and a Pakistani journalist Absar Alam, both denied Mir’s version. It seemed that Sharif said that concerns against Pakistan could be addressed directly to Islamabad instead of to Washington.

This was in line with India ’s consistent stand contrary to Pakistan ’s earlier approach that Indo-Pak ties should be bilateral without third party intervention. After Barkha Dutt and Absar Alam rubbished Mir’s claims the latter confessed that Sharif made no criticism of the PM. He lamely tried to explain away his contradicted version by saying that Sharif spoke in jest. But why did not Mir say this in his original comment on TV? In that remark he even indicated that Sharif considered Manmohan Singh weak and was looking forward to doing business with his successor after 2014.

One will not speculate whether all this happened by coincidence or by design, and if by design, the inspiration of these incidents. Hamid Mir is a powerful and influential TV journalist in Pakistan. Currently there are differences between the Pakistan army and the civil government over how to tackle the Taliban. Nawaz Sharif is seeking a dialogue. The army wants to continue with the status quo by “fighting” the Taliban. Mir sympathized with the army by stating:

“It’s a very complicated situation. The army does not seem to be in the mood for talks as it has gained a lot of ground against the Taliban in the recent past.”

Mir should know. He has after all excellent contacts. He was in fact the last journalist to interview slain Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin laden in Afghanistan in 2002. It is difficult to believe that he could have accomplished this without the clearance, if not cooperation, of the ISI.

In summation, Rahul Gandhi, Narendra Modi and Hamid Mir all passed comments that could have damaged the PM’s US visit. Large sections of big business electronic media and the opposition joined them. Modi and Gandhi are repeatedly projected by the media as the two contenders for becoming prime minister. It is ironic that both contenders are on the same side insofar as the PM’s negotiations in the US were concerned. It is also intriguing that these three fed on each other’s narrative to rubbish the PM. But then, this does not necessarily suggest collusion. It could be pure coincidence. As for big business that funds both media and politics it may matter little which contender becomes PM. Heads I win, tails you lose!

For big business Modi and Gandhi might well be two sides of the same coin. But beyond business interests of the corporate sector there are also powerful international forces interested in damaging relations between India and the US , as well as between India and Pakistan . Now which international forces would be pleased if Indo-US and Indo-Pak elations deteriorated? It is for readers to ponder and arrive at their own conclusions.

Image (c) ibnlive.in.com

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

The great Congress mystery! Sep

30

      4 Votes

There is a mystery related to the functioning of the Congress party that nobody I have asked has been able to clear. The latest episode heightens the mystery. The Union cabinet along with the core group of the Congress party in the presence and with the consent of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi approved the draft of the Ordinance to protect criminal MPs. After the Ordinance was presented to the President he expressed doubts about its legality and delayed signing it. Meanwhile the opposition mounted a blistering attack against the Ordinance. Cabinet ministers and Congress party leaders stoutly defended the Ordinance and accused the opposition of being complicit in the decision to draft the Bill protecting criminal MPs.

Then Congress Vice President Mr. Rahul Gandhi without notice intervened in a Congress press conference and condemned the Ordinance in very strong and intemperate language. He did this while the PM was abroad about to hold very crucial meetings with several heads of states. The timing of Mr. Gandhi’s remarks was so significant that had he not been a leader of such limited understanding one might have concluded that he was representing a hostile foreign power seeking to damage India ’s foreign policy.

After Mr. Gandhi spoke the cabinet ministers and Congress party leaders instead of criticizing his performance somersaulted and fell in line making nonsense of their own earlier publicly stated remarks. This writer has never in his long career seen such a craven display of sycophancy and lack of self respect and honour as long as can be remembered.

Here then is the mystery. What is the secret of Mrs. Gandhi’s hold on all members of the Congress party? She cannot get votes. Her party is performing badly even in her own constituency despite campaigning by her and her family members. She has been accused by credible international sources of receiving illegal funds from foreign sources. She has been accused by credible international sources of having a secret illegal foreign bank account. She has never taken the trouble to deny charges. She has not displayed any significant expertise related to economic, foreign or political policy. Her son, Mr. Rahul Gandhi, is even less accomplished than her. There are serious and credible allegations of his having been detained in the US possessing unaccounted money and drugs and subsequently being released through intervention of the Indian government.

Despite all this, Congress party members from top to bottom behave like craven slaves of mother and son. One cannot fathom the reason for this. One would like to be enlightened. In conclusion this writer would like to clarify that he is not critical mainly of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi or Mr. Rahul Gandhi. They look after their interests as all people are expected to. It is the members of the Congress party that attract the strongest possible criticism. So obnoxious and counter productive is their conduct that it strengthens this writer’s belief that the Congress party must be buried in order to preserve Indian democracy.

Share this:

5 Comments

Posted in Nation

Kashmir exposures Convert crisis into opportunity! Sep

27

      1 Vote

Government should not overspend effort to undo the political damage inflicted by the recent leaked allegations by the Ministry of Defence and General VK Singh. The damage to India’s case in Kashmir cannot be undone. Just days after the recent disclosure terrorists have struck in Jammu to kill army and police personnel. More attacks should be expected by terrorists emboldened by the disclosures vindicating their allegations. Politics is about perception of facts and not about facts themselves. The recent disclosures have confirmed in the public mind all the perceived truths about India’s relationship with Kashmir repeatedly articulated by separatists and many other foreign powers. The government should instead seize the moment to convert a setback into opportunity and settle once and for all the Kashmir dispute that has bedeviled the subcontinent’s peace since Independence.

However, in order to attempt that the government must be honest enough to confront the truth and bold enough to dare an initiative.

What is the truth?

One need no iterate the oft repeated facts relating to the Kashmir dispute. Kashmir is not the problem but the symptom of the problem. The problem is the Partition. Kashmir was a state with contiguous borders with both India and Pakistan. The Hindu ruler of this Muslim majority state wanted independence and good relations with both nations. The attack by Pakistani raiders backed by its army to forcibly seize Kashmir forced the ruler’s hands. He acceded to India in order to obtain the Indian army’s help to repulse the enemy.

As Kashmir Chief Minister Mr. Omar Abdullah pointed out recently, Kashmir unlike other princely states of the Indian Union did not merge with India but stopped short after accession. That is why it has a special status and Article 370. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru at the time of accepting Kashmir’s instrument of accession stated that it was “subject to the will of the people of Kashmir”. This was followed by India’s acceptance of the UN Resolution regarding Plebiscite in Kashmir. For over six decades stupid policies pursued by the governments of India and Pakistan, both acting like foreign pawns, has denied the region peace and stability. The distorted approach of both governments that have behaved like Raja Jaichand and Mir Jafar to ally with foreigners against their own flesh and blood has its roots in the Partition.

Britain offered the opportunity to keep India united by presenting the Cabinet Mission Plan that would have created a federation. Jinnah accepted the proposal. Nehru rejected it because the Plan allowed the Muslim dominated units to secede after 10 years if they so wished. Like pathetic colonial minions the leaders of India and Pakistan accepted Independence and Partition without the borders of the new nations determined. Immediately after Independence, accompanied by Partition, riots engineered by interested foreign powers to perpetuate the division cost a million lives within a few months. Similarly the engineered Kashmir dispute led to the partition of the state in order to create a permanent bone of contention that would prevent reunification.

Nehru, who had rejected the Cabinet Mission Plan and a confederation when these were offered, attempted before his death to undo the spirit of the Partition by creating an Indo-Pakistan confederation. In 1959 President Ayub Khan offered joint defence that would have automatically led to a confederation. But the same President Ayub Khan rejected Nehru’s proposal of a confederation presented by Sheikh Abdullah which Jinnah had accepted at the time of the Cabinet Mission Plan. In other words, both India and Pakistan had wanted confederation. But they had wanted it at different times. Therefore they cannot agree. Is this not shocking diplomacy? The absence of statesmanship displayed by leaders of both governments and their readiness to serve foreign interests could not be more glaring.

The latest revelations by the Indian government and General VK Singh have made prospects of reconciliation ever more remote. Peace will come only if the leaders of India and Pakistan are bold enough to cut the Gordian knot and make a dramatic breakthrough. Critics have opposed the proposed meeting between the Prime Ministers of India and Pakistan scheduled for September 29 in New York. BJP leader and former foreign minister Mr. Yashwant Sinha has stated that such a meeting is premature as long as terrorism continues. He suggested that lower officials should first meet. One begs to differ. Even if lower officials meet and people to people contacts continue for a hundred years there will be no progress.

The problem is the trust deficit. That exists between governments and not between peoples. That exists because the armies of both nations are in contention. Only joint defence and operations to wipe out terrorism from the region will remove the trust deficit. There are more victims of terrorism in Pakistan than in India. Prime Minister Mr. Manmohan Singh should bluntly tell Mr. Nawaz Sharif on September 29 that enough is enough. Unless the armies of both nations cooperate there cannot be peace and stability in the region. If even now, when both nations are besieged by terrorism and instability, their governments cannot act rationally, they never will. Without joint defence the trust deficit cannot be removed. If there is joint defence it must inevitably lead to some form of confederation. Both leaders should read the writing on the wall. They should forget what their critics might say today. They should focus on what historians will say tomorrow.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Politicians, Army, playing with fire! Sep

25

      1 Vote

General VK Singh reportedly has decided to file an application with the Right to Information (RTI) commission seeking a copy of General Vinod Bhatia’s secret report on the alleged misuse of the top secret Technical Support Division (TSD) during his tenure as Army Chief. Will the government respond by releasing the secret report? After news of the report appeared in the media the government stated that the report “impinges on matters of national security and, as such, the government will take a decision and further actions after careful examination.” If the contents of the report impinge on national security it is difficult to see how the government can agree to release the report.

However, then a further question is raised. If the report will not be released to the public how was it allowed to be leaked to the media? After the media exposure the government did not deny the report or displayed reticence but went out of its way to acknowledge its contents and resolved to probe the affair. One spokesperson of the Congress party blithely informed TV that since the media had obtained the report the matter had to be fully probed. But the government has not addressed the obvious question of how the media obtained the report. From all accounts it has not ordered an inquiry into who leaked the report and taken steps to punish the guilty. The circumstantial evidence of the government itself leaking the report is compelling. In the pursuit of petty partisan politics was the government oblivious of the grave implications that might flow from the leakage?

That is not all. Politicians further endangered the situation. BJP President Mr. Rajnath Singh defended General VK Singh and charged the UPA government with targeting him because he shared a platform with Mr. Narendra Modi. The Punjab Congress was quick to retaliate. Captain Amarinder Singh reiterated the allegation in the report that General VK Singh had misused TSD to attempt scuttling the appointment of the current Army Chief General Bikram Singh. He challenged Punjab Chief Minister Mr. Prakash Singh Badal to clarify his stand since he was supporting the BJP and Mr. Narendra Modi.

Have India ’s politicians gone stark raving mad? In the pursuit of their stupid and petty rivalries they are creating a situation that could encourage polarization between Hindu and Sikh, between Haryana and Punjab . Whatever the truth of real or imagined differences between army generals, these might be based upon entirely professional grounds. But in public perception the differences could most likely be seen as between communities and states. If such perception is allowed to grow, how will it affect all the ranks in the army?

The TSD unit was conceived and created after the 26/11 terrorist attack in Mumbai. The purpose of this top secret unit was to counter terrorism. Now not only the existence of this top secret unit is blown, but efforts are actually being made to reveal its operations and functioning in order to settle political scores. The most far reaching consequences of this sorry episode might well be General VK Singh rebuttal of the allegations against him publicized by the government. In an interview to Times Now TV channel he furnished damaging details of how the army has been operating in Jammu and Kashmir for the past many decades. His revelations make mockery of India ’s official stand on Kashmir.

One can imagine how gleefully members of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) in China and the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) in Pakistan would be with rapt attention watching the unfolding exposure of the functioning of India’s top secret army unit established to counter terrorism.

Share this:

1 Comment

Posted in Nation

Has Government committed treason? Sep

22

      2 Votes

Not surprisingly the controversy created by the media exposure and its subsequent official confirmation of the alleged misuse of the Technical Services Division (TSD) by former Army Chief General VK Singh is expected to snowball into a major national crisis. But the crisis may not evolve as those who leaked the information might imagine. According to The Indian Express that published the report General Singh had conveyed a warning that if they went ahead and published it “they will get it in the neck”. General Singh reportedly told the Press Trust of India (PTI) news agency that anyone recommending a probe into the functioning of TSD was being nonsensical because its operations were meant to be secret.

General Singh might have enlightened the public a little more. The mere fact that the inquiry into the functioning of TSD was “secret” suggests that the TSD operation was not only secret but probably “top secret”. If that is the case the consequences for the government as well as for media outlets utilized by the government could be very serious. In that event even the existence of TSD should never have been publicized. Further, if there is exposure of the actual working of the top secret unit, leaking information about it may well be considered treasonable under law, regardless of whether infromation is true or false. It involves national security. Such information can help the nation’s enemies. Even knowledge of the existence of TSD can help the nation’s enemies.

Did the government factor this aspect into its calculations before rushing to the media with its leaks? The last on this issue has not been heard. Events thus far may be in fact just the start of a crisis that could traumatize the system.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

President, army and governance! Sep

21

      1 Vote

According to media reports the Defence Ministry constituted a secret Board of Officers body headed by Lt General Vinod Bhatia to probe alleged irregularities committed during the tenure of former Army Chief General VK Singh. It is alleged that General Singh set up a controversial Military Intelligence unit, Technical Services Division (TSD) that misused secret funds to conduct unauthorized covert operations that interfered in domestic politics. According to reports General Bhatia has advised a fuller probe by an external agency like the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The report alleges that TDS misused secret funds in an effort to destabilize the Jammu and Kashmir government, as well as block the promotion of the present Army Chief General Bikram Singh. The media report has furnished details about how these irregularities were sought to be accomplished.

This report was played up as a first page banner in The Indian Express, and appeared as an unobtrusive single column in the inside pages of The Times of India. The Express claims that it tried unsuccessfully to contact General VK Singh but managed to interact through a mutual contact that quoted the General to say that the report was rubbish and the government was motivated by the fact that he had shared a public platform with opposition leader Mr. Narendra Modi. General Bhatia had submitted his report to the Defence Ministry in March this year. This is an amazing episode and offers glaring evidence of how deeply governance and responsibility to preserve national security have sunk. The following questions need to be addressed.

First, now that the report has been quoted in the media it has to be established whether the allegations leveled by General Bhatia’s team of officers are valid. If true it reveals a shocking state of affairs in which a serving Army Chief can so misuse his powers to further political ends unconnected to his call of duty. If untrue, it reveals an equally shocking state of affairs in which politics has infected the armed forces to allow such false and motivated allegations to be made in order to settle differences within the Defence Ministry. Secondly, the report was submitted in March. Why has it surfaced only now almost six months later after the Defence Minister reportedly has got into the act? Does this validate General Singh’s reported comment that he is being targeted only because he shared a public platform with Mr. Narendra Modi? Thirdly, if it be assumed that the report has substance surely there are various discreet methods of addressing the issue, of even indirectly punishing the guilty, and keep the controversy away from public attention?

Transparency in governance is an excellent principle and the media cannot be criticized for playing up the report when offered the chance. But does it behoove a government to throw all considerations of national security to the winds and jeopardize it by publicizing such an episode if indeed it occurred as alleged? What kind of government is ruling India , and what kind of priorities does it have?

Finally, one cannot but reflect once again whether there can ever be accountability in our collapsing democracy unless the President discharges the responsibilities assigned to his post by our Constitution. It is weeks since communal riots exposed the failure of law and order in Uttar Pradesh. Every single party spokesperson has demanded that the government be dismissed. Official spokespersons of the Congress have said that law and order has collapsed. Yet the central government remains a mute spectator although it claims that the rule of law has collapsed in the state. Neither the Prime Minister nor the President has taken a single tiny step to introduce Governor’s rule. The latest episode related to the TSD report has grave implications for the state of affairs in our armed forces as well as for national security. The President as the Supreme Commander of the armed forces is directly responsible to safeguard both. Will he still remain mute?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Modi’s poll campaign error! Sep

19

      Rate This

From all accounts Mr. Narendra Modi’s inaugural campaign rally in Rewari after being anointed Prime Ministerial candidate of the BJP was the largest ever seen in the district. In some of his earlier rallies also common people had flocked to his meetings with great enthusiasm. Obviously, in addition to the formidable publicity and mobilization organized by the RSS and powerful business interests supporting Mr. Modi, certain qualities of his persona too have caught the imagination of the masses. This has been seized by political analysts and his party’s leaders to describe Mr. Modi as the first great national Other Backward Classes (OBC) leader who might become Prime Minister. Media analysts may be forgiven for their ignorance of political ground realities to describe Mr. Modi as a national OBC leader. But surely the poll managers of the BJP ought to have known better?

It is a grievous flaw to describe Mr. Modi as a national OBC icon. Not only are BJP leaders assiduously promoting this image, even Mr. Modi himself seems to have become victim of this flawed propaganda. Mr. Modi belongs to the Ghanchi caste found only in the state of Gujarat . It is a sub-caste in the OBC category. People belonging to the Teli caste in other states may empathize with the Ghanchi caste because of a shared occupational history related to extraction of oil. Otherwise the Ghanchi caste will have little relevance outside Gujarat . Belonging to the Ghanchi caste makes Mr. Modi an OBC leader. It does not make him a national icon of OBC voters. There is no national OBC icon. There cannot be a national OBC icon. There can only be a national icon who is an OBC. The distinction should be appreciated.

The very logic of caste identity runs counter to a nationwide OBC identity. Caste mobilization becomes easy precisely because the approach is tribal. Caste leaders often unite to make common cause. That makes it easy and convenient for the big business corporate sector to use money power to split or align political forces to suit their interest. But when have castes en block voted for a leader belonging to another caste because of his OBC status? Why do not the Kurmis in Bihar vote for Mr. Laloo Yadav, or the Yadavs vote for Mr. Nitish Kumar? Before Mr. Modi became his party’s election campaign chief the BJP had already laid the ground for positive poll results in UP after Mr. Rajnath Singh brought back Mr. Kalyan Singh into his party’s fold. The revived Thakur-Kurmi alliance had earlier brought the BJP its largest ever parliamentry tally of 57 MPs. With Miss Uma Bharati entering UP politics, in addition to her oratory expected to consolidate the Hindutva vote bank, she will also undoubtedly attract Lodh voters belonging to her caste.

Yet media analysts and BJP poll managers are busy trying to exploit Mr. Modi’s OBC status to project him as the first great OBC national leader who might become Prime Minister. Unfortunately, Mr. Modi has bought this flawed approach. Celebrating his birthday recently in Gujarat Mr. Modi reached out and invited many OBC leaders of the organized and unorganized sectors to his function. National thinking has become so corrupted and distorted by the caste reservation policy and mobilization of quick vote banks that an obvious truth escaped media analysts as well as the poll campaign managers of the BJP. If enthusiastic masses have flocked to Mr. Modi’s rallies it is not because he is a national OBC icon. It is because people have recognized that Mr. Modi has risen from very humble origins like themselves to acquire a national political status. If the masses empathize with Mr. Modi it is not because he is an OBC but because he was poor and is now powerful.

The flawed approach adopted by Mr. Modi and the BJP regarding the importance of his OBC status can have very far reaching consequences. It will determine what kind of Indian will emerge tomorrow if Mr. Modi does become Prime Minister. On his birthday Mr. Modi invited OBC leaders belonging to the organized and unorganized sectors of labour. OBC leaders can mobilize votes. That is an understandably attractive attribute. But so can union leaders of organized and unorganized labour mobilize voters. Why could not Mr. Modi have focused on them instead? Does Mr. Modi seek an India of his dreams symbolized by his proposed Statue of Unity to consolidate on the prevalent national divisive culture based upon over 4000 contending castes battling for economic crumbs?

Or does he seek to create a new Indian with a national identity above caste and community ready to confront the 21st century world? Will he support caste-based reservation or economic criteria for job and educational reservation? Will he promote universal compulsory primary education to lift all castes from poverty? These are some questions that Mr. Modi and the leaders of the BJP need to ponder if they seek a genuine political change. They have to decide whether they want victory in the present or a victory for the future. Do they want to cater to India of the present or to India of the future that will belong to the young?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Modi’s proposed Statue of Unity! Sep

17

      1 Vote

Concluding his first public rally in Rewari after being anointed Prime Ministerial candidate of the BJP, Mr. Narendra Modi appealed to his audience to donate pieces of iron from each village in the state to be used for constructing his proposed Statue of Unity on the sea coast of Gujarat . Mr. Modi wants similar donations of iron pieces from each village in each state across the nation in honour of Sardar Vallabhai Patel who will symbolize unity in the proposed statue. Mr. Modi has declared his intention of constructing the tallest statue in the world, taller than America ’s Statue of Liberty, in honour of Sardar Patel.

This writer has serious objection to the proposal. Sardar Patel was undoubtedly a very great man, as were Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru. Patel performed great service to the nation by unifying the princely states of India after Independence . But though these great leaders did great things for the nation they also committed unforgivable errors the consequence of which continue to haunt our nation. These leaders, mainly Sardar Patel, united Bharat but they divided India . They divided India without the slightest justification. They divided India because they allowed themselves to be influenced and manipulated by the British.

With just over 1000 people killed in Punjab through communal riots engineered by the British administration immediately after Lord Mountbatten became India ’s Viceroy, and about 12000 killed in Bihar and Bengal over a period of two years, these leaders violated their solemn pledge to the people of India by accepting Partition. Gandhi on the fateful day, June 3, 1947 when the Congress formally accepted Partition, conveniently observed his ‘day of silence’. Nehru and Patel were the hawks in the Congress Working Committee in favour of accepting Partition. JB Kripalani, Jayaprakash Narain and Ram Manohar Lohia who opposed Partition were overruled by the rest. On June 2, on eve of the decision, Gandhi assured Mountbatten who visited him that he would not create any hurdles against the decision.

In what manner then might Sardar Patel symbolize unity? After two lawyers from Gujarat, Gandhi and Jinnah, and two aristocrats from Uttar Pradesh, Nehru and Liaquat Ali, butchered and cut asunder Punjab and Bengal displaying their ignorance about the ground realities in these states, people today should display some sensitivity towards the sentiments of provinces where over a million people were slaughtered and over ten million rendered homeless due to the follies of these leaders. In case critics challenge this view about the unforgivable decision about the Partition, let them note that both Gandhi and Nehru acknowledged their error. Gandhi wanted to settle down in Pakistan to undo the Partition just before he was assassinated thanks to ignored security measures during Sardar Patel’s tenure as Home Minister. Nehru sent Sheikh Abdullah to Pakistan to plead with President Ayub Khan to reunite India and Pakistan through a proposed confederation during which effort he died.

Therefore this writer would like to remind Mr. Narendra Modi and many others from different parts of India that they may have their history and may choose to honour whom they wish. The peoples of Punjab and Bengal have their own history and their own memories to recall. Congress leaders today may be the best in the land. They are welcome to govern India . But the Congress Party as Imperial Britain’s instrument to partition India deserves to be buried. Let Congress leaders reinvent themselves into a new organization. After all, this demand merely echoes the last wish of the most revered Congress icon, Mahatma Gandhi, on the day before he died.

Mr. Modi is welcome to construct his Statue of Unity. The people of Punjab and Bengal might seek their own way of responding to history. Human folly can delay but not derail history. Ultimately, cultural nationalism will triumph.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Profit & Loss of UP riots! Sep

14

      Rate This

All political parties and media outlets seem agreed that the recent Muzzafarnagar riots which cost 40 lives and brought untold misery to thousands who fled their homes, were the result of a conspiracy. But all seem to disagree about who was behind the conspiracy. The UP government was suspiciously lax in acting on warnings issued by the central government months earlier. Inexplicably it allowed a Jat mahapanchayat of 1.5 lakh people just 20 km from Muzaffarnagar in violation of prohibitory orders in force in the entire district due to prevailing tension. Thousands of vehicles and tractors from Haryana, Delhi and the neighbouring districts of UP were allowed to descend on the venue of the mahapanchayat. One UP minister has acknowledged that there was an administrative lapse. Samajwadi Party (SP) leader Mr. Mulayam Singh was at pains to stress that the riots were not communal but ethnic – between Jats and Muslims. Chief Minister Mr. Akhilesh Yadav has accused other political parties for the conspiracy.

The UP administration has charged that a five minute fake video was used to fan violence. One BJP leader has been arrested in connection with that video. The district administration of Muzafarnagar lodged criminal cases against a senior BJP leader and former minister along with three other BJP leaders for violating the prohibitory order and allegedly delivered provocative speeches during the Jat mahapanchayat. The BJP leaders have denied charges. Leaders of the Bharat Kisan Union (BKU) and the Congress were also charged on similar grounds. Allegations and counter allegations of conspiracy to instigate the riots flew thick and fast between the BJP, SP, Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) and Congress. However, it is futile to speculate who was behind the conspiracy. It is futile to speculate that if there was indeed a conspiracy, whether it was the work of individual politicians or was it sanctioned by their respective political organizations. What can be assessed with some accuracy is the political impact of riots. Which party gained, and which party lost?

The SP is a huge loser. It is likely to lose its Muslim vote which is vital for its electoral success. Had Muzzafarnagar limited itself to communal tension the SP would have gained. That explains the seemingly deliberate administrative dereliction of duty. The Muslims of West UP who supported Mr. Ajit Singh’s Rashtriya Lok DaL (RLD) might have been weaned away to support SP. But things got out of hand. The Jat mahapanchayat was followed by horrendous riots. The government’s failure has left the Muslim community bitter and alienated.

The BSP could be a gainer. The first Muslim priority as of present is to remove this government. In the assembly elections the BSP offers the best chance of doing it. Similarly the Congress could be a gainer. For parliamentary elections the Muslim vote will attempt to block the BJP. On present reckoning the Congress provides the only hope of accomplishing that.

The BJP is the biggest gainer. Notwithstanding Mr. Mulayam Singh’s nitpicking distinction between communal riots and ethnic riots, the accession of the Jat vote to the BJP, along with widespread communal polarization following the riots across the state, could provide a huge boost to BJP prospects.

The RLD is the biggest loser. The traditional harmony between Muslims and Jats carefully nurtured by the late Choudhary Charan Singh rendered West UP a solid base for the RLD. That harmony has been shattered. The cost of this division will be very heavy. It could destroy the dream of carving a new state of Harit Pradesh in West UP. Both the Jats and the Muslims yearned for it. The Muslims are one third of the population in the region. The Deoband centre of religious learning is in the region. The destruction of the fine balance between Jats and Muslims may be irreparable for a long time. Both communities may now repent at leisure.

It is in this cynical way that politicians will calculate the outcome of the Muzzafarnagar riots. They will not spare a thought for the heartrending tragedy befallen to innocent women and children. Their crime was that they belonged to a community. Their weakness was that they were poor. Their tragedy was that they lived in a country where politics is conducted by a cynical, cruel and corrupt class of leaders.

Share this:

1 Comment

Posted in Nation

Modified Modi! Sep

12

      2 Votes

According to media reports the BJP will formally anoint Mr. Narendra Modi as its Prime Ministerial candidate when the party’s parliamentary board meeting is held on Friday. Some time earlier the view had been expressed in these columns that there was no substantive difference between Prime Minister Mr. Manmohan Singh and Mr. Narendra Modi insofar as approach to economic policy was concerned. Both leaders seem to be focused mainly on quick growth based upon foreign investment and delivery of maximum facilities to the big corporate sector.

However, this writer deemed Mr. Modi superior because he was described as a “muscular” version of the Prime Minister. In Gujarat he offered quicker and smoother delivery to big business than the Prime Minister could at the centre. The reason was simple. There was no extra constitutional authority to derail and slow down Mr. Modi in Gujarat as the office of the National Advisory Council did to the Prime Minister in Delhi . The Prime Minister was helpless. He was appointed by Mrs. Sonia Gandhi and had to function under her direction. It was thought that Mr. Modi would have no such fetters to implement the economic model in which the Prime Minister reposed his faith. That view it seems was too hasty. Mr. Modi may in fact be no more muscular than the Prime Minister.

Recent events should leave no doubt that if Mr. Modi is declared as the BJP’s Prime Ministerial candidate it will be only due to the pressure exerted by the RSS on the party. The RSS has appointed Mr. Modi as the party’s Prime Ministerial candidate and left it to the party to announce the decision. Mr. Modi cannot be unaware of the crucial RSS support needed for his elevation. The support reportedly was promised after extended parleys and eventually the decision was taken after agreement was reached on the minimum demands conveyed by the RSS. According to media reports the four conditions set by the RSS for Mr. Modi to receive support were to pledge building a grand Ram Temple in Ayodhya, to enforce the contentious Uniform Civil Code across the country, to repeal of Article 370 in J&K and end the special status of the state, and to press for full protection of cows. All four conditions reflect policies of traditional Hindutva.

However, the merits or otherwise of the policies insisted upon by the RSS are not important. What is significant is that the RSS is insistent upon the implementation of its agenda. Like Mrs. Sonia Gandhi choosing Mr. Manmohan Singh as Prime Minister, the RSS has chosen Mr. Modi as its candidate. But unlike Mrs. Gandhi who established her National Advisory Council to offer policy directives to the government after Mr. Manmohan Singh assumed office, Mr. Mohan Bhagwat has not wasted time. He has already laid down the minimum policy agenda. This is just the start.

Many more policy directives should be expected if Mr. Modi does indeed become Prime Minister. Although Mr. Modi therefore may not prove to be a more muscular version of Mr. Manmohan Singh, constrained as he will be by an extra constitutional body, Mr. Mohan Bhagwat certainly is showing signs of being a much more muscular version of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi. This aspect needs to be considered carefully by all the supporters of Mr. Modi. It should be amply clear that apart from support by members of the public Mr. Modi is heavily backed by the most powerful big business corporate sector. Apart from Mr. Modi’s own undoubted attributes, his popularity depends heavily on the massive support rendered to him by the big business electronic media. There is nothing surprising about that. Big business will protect its own interests. But a serious question arises.

Many supporters of Mr. Modi draw comfort from the fact that he has not personally referred to any of the pro-Hindu policies associated with the hardcore Hindutva elements of the RSS. These supporters are being delusional. They betray their ignorance about how politics is played out. The approval of every action and every statement by any of the sources in the BJP will devolve on Mr. Modi as the election campaign in charge. His silence is meaningless. Silence will be taken as assent. If Mr. Modi disapproves of any policy or statement by members of his party he will have to contradict them publicly to record his dissent. Voters are influenced by whole parties and not by their perception of any one individual, however powerful or charismatic.

What should be clear therefore to all supporters of Mr. Modi, especially the powerful big business elements, is that the RSS agenda must be factored in their calculations. This is because Mr. Modi and RSS will be inseparable if he becomes the Prime Minister. There will be nothing wrong with that if Mr. Modi and the RSS see eye to eye on all policy matters. If on the other hand Mr. Modi’s personal predilection is at variance from the RSS, there could be a very serious problem. In that event Mr. Modi’s government could become as paralyzed as Mr. Manmohan Singh’s government. There would be precisely the same kind of diarchy in governance as paralyzed the UPA government. The paralysis in the UPA government became so palpable that even Congress General Secretary Mr. Digvijay Singh was constrained to acknowledge publicly that the existing system of diarchy was undesirable.

The powerful vested interests favouring Mr. Modi should therefore carefully scrutinize the total RSS agenda in order to continue their support. This applies to all the international big business executives who descended from Europe and South America to endorse Mr. Modi, to all the young Indians who seek a modern twenty-first century nation and look up to Mr. Modi, to all the biggest business houses in the nation who are solidly backing Mr. Modi, and to all the mainstream media TV anchors who swoon with excitement each time Mr. Modi sneezes. It is entirely possible of course that the RSS policies may exceed their wildest dreams of promoting economic growth and progress in India . But that is a prospect it would be more prudent for them to assess now instead of later. What needs to be understood is that either Mr. Modi is totally supportive of RSS policies, or if he is not, there are prospects once again of paralyzing diarchy that could ruin governance in India.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Post navigation← Older posts

Media’s response to Pak Envoy! Oct

9

      1 Vote

During a press interview to a foreign journalist President Pranab Mukherjee said that even if cross border terrorism was perpetrated by non-state actors as Islamabad claimed, the Pakistan government could not evade responsibility. The territory was under the jurisdiction of the government, the President pointed out. “Non-state actors do not descend from heaven,

” he said. This view was echoed by Information and Broadcasting (I&B) Minister Mr. Manish Tewari who told media that the crossing over by terrorists and non-state actors suggested either complicity or negligence by the Pakistan government. “Obviously these terrorists or non-state actors are not coming out of a vacuum,”

he said.

The Pakistan High Commissioner to India Mr. Salman Bashir gave a veiled rejoinder to these remarks. But he focused his criticism mainly against the media. He accused the media of focusing exclusively on “so-called” incursions and infiltrations from across the border.

He said:

“Whoever is making the argument that they have not descended from heaven, I want to ask who are these thousands of people who are involved in heinous acts of terrorism in Pakistan . Have they descended from heaven? We agree they have not descended from heaven, from where are they being funded and sourced?”

One can appreciate the constraints under which Pakistan ’s official envoy to India has to function. Mr. Bashir said something, and he implied something. Both his assertion and implication deserve attention. Since he thought it fit to direct his ire against the Indian media this writer takes the liberty of directly responding to his criticism.

Mr. Bashir cannot blame the Indian media of responding to continued incursions from across the border which for diplomatic compulsions he described as “so-called”. But he was right to point out the failure of the Indian government as well as the media to adequately differentiate between the government and non-state actors in Pakistan . Mr. Bashir has rightly asserted that “thousands of terrorists” are operating against Pakistan who obviously did not descend from heaven. By implication this is tacit admission of failure of the Pakistan government. It is a fact that there are substantially more victims of terrorism in Pakistan than in India including in the state of J&K. Then Mr. Bashir went on to question the source of funding and training of these terrorists. His central plea was for the enhancement of cooperation between Islamabad and New Delhi.

He said:

“We have evidence which we have shared and are prepared to share with the rest of the world and particularly with the government of India on fuelling of acts of terrorism in Pakistan .”

Mr. Bashir’s plea for greater cooperation between India and Pakistan to fight terror clearly indicates that by questioning the source of terror funding he was not pointing a finger at India . He was obviously indicating the hand of Al Qaeda which inspires global terrorism. In the light of the reality of terrorist activity in Pakistan funded and directed by global forces the Indian government is clearly remiss in not taking an initiative for closer cooperation with Pakistan to combat terror. New Delhi ’s inhibition may be explained by its continued doubts about how deeply subverted Pakistan ’s security establishment is by pro-terror elements. Well, the Indian media has no such inhibitions. Since Mr. Bashir squarely blamed the Indian media I take the liberty of directly addressing him. I put a question to the Pakistan government through him that the Indian government has failed to do.

Mr. Bashir you seek closer cooperation between India and Pakistan , you admit that there are thousands of terrorists operating inside Pakistan . You indicate that they are funded and directed from abroad. You tacitly imply though you do not state that they cannot operate without help from a section of the official machinery. I agree with your overall analysis. My question is: Will the Pakistan government accept an offer of joint intelligence and joint operations against terror to wipe out these non-state actors from both our countries?

I know that you may not deign to respond to such a question from a mere media person instead of from the government. But let me assure you. If you do answer the media will compel the Indian government to respond appropriately.

So will you respond?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

The President’s curious priorities! Oct

8

      1 Vote

After the media pointed out that the credit for the rollback of the Ordinance on convicted MPs went to President Pranab Mukherjee and not to Congress Vice-President Rahul Gandhi who exploited the President’s known reluctance to sign it, Mr. LK Advani praised the President for his decision. However, the President reacted to this praise most curiously. The President with uncalled for modesty went out of his way to dissociate himself from the decision to roll back the Ordinance. It is known that he sat over the Ordinance and was reluctant to sign it. By signing it he could have possibly attracted strictures from the Supreme Court to make his position untenable. Understandably he mulled over the matter and shared his views with UPA Ministers who called on him to discuss the Ordinance. It was after that when Mr. Rahul Gandhi jumped into the controversy to corner credit. Mr. Advani’s praise for the President therefore was a routine and unexceptionable observation.

However the President reacted to the media in response to such praise by saying:

“I cannot comment on what the Opposition has said about my role. My duties are now completely determined by the Indian Constitution.”

The praise for the President was precisely because he did follow the Constitution by not immediately signing the Ordinance. Why, then, his curiously defensive rejoinder? Eyebrows were further raised after the President’s son, Mr. Abhijeet Mukherjee, called on the chief victim of the scrapped Ordinance, Mr. Lalu Prasad Yadav, who was in jail. The popular conclusion derived from this visit was that Mr. Mukherjee had gone there to convince Mr. Yadav that the decision not to sign the Ordinance reflected no personal motive of the President but was dictated by the Constitution. This was unnecessary. Mr. Yadav one is sure is sufficiently knowledgeable to have been aware of that. If such speculation has any basis it is certainly odd that the President should be so concerned about Mr. Yadav’s feelings. The President after all is above party politics.

Alas, it does not seem that the President is as much above party politics as he should be. His continued silence over the horrendous events in Andhra is equally mystifying. After the Union government hastily declared the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh by ceding the new state of Telangana despite the state assembly being overwhelmingly opposed to the measure, the entire state is in flames. Apart from mammoth public protest and indefinite fasts launched by politicians, the whole state is without electric power because of a strike by workers. And this situation has been growing and worsening for days. Has not the Constitutional machinery in the state collapsed to necessitate the application of Article 356 to impose President’s rule in Andhra to restore order? But the Prime Minister and the Union cabinet are mute.

Surprisingly, even the President is silent. Article 78 (b) of the Constitution states: “It shall be the duty of the Prime Minister to furnish such information relating to the administration of the affairs of the Union and proposals for legislation as the President may call for.” Should not the President invoke this Article and initiate action? Surely the millions of agitated people in Andhra Pradesh deserve as much attention as Mr. Lalu Yadav should get?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Snooping, security and privacy! Oct

5

      1 Vote

After Julian Assange and the Wikileaks controversy it is the Edgar Snowden affair that has rocked the world. Snowden was a government contractor working at the National Security Agency (NSA) in America. The NSA in order to protect the US snoops on citizens in America and abroad looking for terrorist connections. The NSA collects and analyses foreign communication and foreign signals of intelligence in order to protect the US. In an interview in Hong Kong Snowden leaked top-secret government surveillance programs that led to an international debate over national security versus individual privacy. In a recent statement to the European Parliament Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Snowden said:

“A culture of secrecy has denied our societies the opportunity to determine the appropriate balance between the human right of privacy and the governmental interest in investigation.”

Among Snowden’s leaks was information about secret US surveillance of foreign governments including Brazil and India. The Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff in protest lashed out at the US in the UN General Assembly and canceled her official visit to Washington. Critics in India not only criticized the US but berated the Indian government after disclosures that it had also like America and China snooped on citizens.

Whatever the extent of public outrage over official snooping, it will not and cannot stop. The world needs a reality check. As long as terrorism survives in the world and weapons of mass destruction can be manufactured by private citizens in a garage, surveillance is a survival imperative for governments. What is required is that such surveillance by all governments be monitored and controlled by the UN.

Technology has not only enabled private citizens to manufacture weapons of mass destruction, but also to snoop on governments and citizens alike. In the foreseeable future therefore privacy cannot be guaranteed for any citizen or government. In the event is it not prudent for people to adjust to the new reality? In other words technology will render total transparency for governments and private citizens unavoidable. It will signify a game changing new culture for mankind. Should not people therefore start adjusting to this change and make their lives totally transparent? It may lead to a happier and safer world.

Indeed, there could well be advantages in being snooped upon! While many people criticize the government’s snooping policy, so do I but for different reasons. My complaint is that the government does not bug my telephone, hack my computer or bug my regular haunts where I have coffee sessions with friends. I want to be heard but nobody listens. Does the government think that it is only the rich and the powerful that can provide useful information?

So can ordinary people like this writer. The government should bug ordinary people too in order to create a level playing field. Not only Neera Radia and Amar Singh are worth snooping on. People like me too have valuable ideas that would help the government. Alas! All my ideas and the pearls of wisdom exchanged with friends go waste because the government does not snoop on me. If the government were to do so would not some of that wisdom penetrate the dense minds of our rulers to improve governance and conditions in our nation?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Politics of convicted MPs! Oct

3

      1 Vote

The current controversy over the Supreme Court (SC) judgment and the government’s Ordinance on the continuance of convicted MPs in legislatures needs to be appreciated in its proper perspective. Right now corruption is a very emotive issue. The public not surprisingly has jumped to the conclusion that the Ordinance which sought to overrule the SC judgment was part of political chicanery. But to what extent does the SC judgment or for that matter the Ordinance actually affect the prevalence of corruption in the system? Is everybody in the government, parliament and judiciary missing the wood for the trees?

The existing Representation of Peoples (RP) Act was challenged by two writ petitions filed by advocate Lily Thomas and Lok Prahari, through its General Secretary S. N. Shukla. The petitioners questioned the legality of MPs continuing in parliament despite conviction by obtaining a stay order and further hearing from a higher court. The SC considered the RP Act unconstitutional and ruled that immediately after conviction the MP with a sentence of two or more years.must be disqualified. The Union cabinet drafted an ordinance to neutralize the Supreme Court’s order mandating immediate disqualification. The government held that if the conviction was stayed by the higher court within 90 days the elected representative should not be disqualified. But the government in its ordinance denied the convicted MP perks and voting rights till being cleared by a higher court. Only, the MP’s seat would remain occupied and there would be no by-election.

Recognizing ground realities the government considered the ease with which motivated and fraudulent prosecution and conviction could be secured from lower courts to harm even innocent politicians. Law Minister Kapil Sibal said that “everybody knows the judicial system has miserably failed to save itself from corruption charges and nepotism”. Even though the Ordinance remedy may be flawed the truth of judicial corruption cannot be denied and has indeed been voiced by Supreme Court judges and reputed jurists.

The media has gone to town attributing Rahul Gandhi’s outburst against the Ordinance as the trigger to clean up the system and check corruption and criminalization. The reality is of course that it was the President’s doubts about the legality of the Ordinance conveyed to cabinet ministers that was seized by the Congress party to enact Rahul Gandhi’s drama in order to obtain credit. The entire issue is being projected by the media and perhaps being swallowed by the public as a great fight against corruption launched by the Congress inspired by Rahul Gandhi. This is laughable. The politicians, the judiciary and the media are living in world of make believe. Consider the reality.

Two MPs, Lalu Yadav and Rashid Masood have been unseated in parliament after being convicted in corruption cases. Their corruption was committed decades ago. Lalu Yadav has been convicted after 17 years and Masood has been convicted after 23 years of their misdemeanors. Even if neither was a sitting MP both would have enjoyed three of four terms of being in parliament before this recent conviction. What kind of fight against corruption and cleansing of parliament is that? Currently there would be a dozen leading MPs involved in corruption during the Commonwealth Games and other mega scams under investigation and facing court proceedings. Will they be unseated after remaining in parliament for the next several terms and being convicted after a few decades?

The prime need is to make mandatory the completion of all court cases within six months so that speedy justice can punish the guilty. That calls for serious judicial reform. Instead of addressing that the obsession with legal nitpicking related to the RP Act through Supreme Court rulings and government Ordinances is meaningless and irrelevant. It is designed only to deceive the public into believing that corruption is genuinely being fought.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

PM’s US trip succeeds despite sabotage! Oct

1

      1 Vote

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to America has been as successful as could be reasonably expected. It was a crucial trip during which the PM met President Obama, Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and heads of other SAARC nations. In his meeting with President Obama a game changing breakthrough was achieved not sufficiently appreciated by analysts. America and India have agreed to become closest partners for defence cooperation. For transfer of defence technology India ’s relations with the US are now at par with Britain.

This is what Pandit Nehru sought from President Kennedy after the Sino-Indian conflict of 1962 when the latter’s death aborted the effort. This is what President Bush sought when he signed the nuclear deal but that effort failed because the Indian government scared of domestic criticism failed to deliver. Now agreement has been reached. The first sign of change is evident from India ’s consent to participate in joint naval exercises in the world’s largest maritime exercise involving dozens of countries. China is not invited to the exercise and the People’s Liberation Army has expressed strong opposition to it. Regardless of the PM’s future the Indo-US deal has been signed. It is likely to endure because it is not between political parties but between governments.

The PM’s meeting with his Pakistani counterpart was as crucial. Though no breakthrough was achieved or attempted the ice was broken. Contrary to the expectations of sceptics the PM addressed India ’s immediate concerns about border violations and terror camps. Mr. Sharif did acknowledge those concerns and promised action to stabilize the border. After he delivers some results the PMs will meet to carry the dialogue further. Already undated invitations for such meeting have been extended. If the PM achieved a big step forward towards the US , he also managed a baby half-step towards Pakistan . Now it remains to be seen how the agreements of this visit actually translate into results.

Anyone following the run-up to the Prime Minister’s visit would marvel at the number of glitches that suddenly erupted to mar its prospects. And for each manufactured event to scuttle progress in the talks the media played its part by a hysterical negative approach to the visit. The opposition parties by their strident criticism of the PM while he was abroad, throwing all accepted diplomatic norms to the winds, also played its part. It is a well established norm that opposition parties do not attack a head of state when he is abroad or when opposition leaders themselves are abroad. This is what democratic bipartisan approach to foreign policy denotes. But the BJP launched a shrill attack against the PM demanding an explanation while he was in the US.

The rot started with Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi. He enacted a preplanned unprecedented theatrical performance to rubbish the PM just hours before he was scheduled to meet President Obama. This demeaned the PM in the eyes of the opposition and demands for his resignation were voiced. It is a reflection of our sick state of politics that even the PM’s former press Advisor Mr. Sanjay Baru was swept along the popular current to advise the PM to resign. It is amazing that not a single voice within or outside the Congress party has made the obvious democratic demand. After the intemperate, ill-timed and irresponsible statement by the ruling party’s vice-president to damage prospects of international negotiations, it is Rahul Gandhi who should be sacked from his post if he does not voluntarily resign.

Why should the PM be asked to quit?

Narendra Modi in a public rally in Delhi lashed out at Gandhi. But he was equally amiss himself. In his speech he sought to damage the PM’s foreign visit by uttering two falsehoods. The first was that the PM had allegedly lamented to Obama that India was a very poor nation in need of help. From where did Modi get his information?

From all accounts the PM discussed terrorism and not India ’s poverty. The second falsehood was even more intriguing. Based upon a TV quote by a noted Pakistani journalist Modi attempted to further muddy the atmosphere just hours before the PM and Nawaz Sharif were to meet. He quoted Pakistani anchor of Geo TV, Hamid Mir, who alleged on TV that Nawaz Sharif had described the PM as a “village woman” pleading before the US President. This was supposed to be said over a breakfast interview given by Sharif to two other journalists and Mir. The two other journalists, Barkha Dutt and a Pakistani journalist Absar Alam, both denied Mir’s version. It seemed that Sharif said that concerns against Pakistan could be addressed directly to Islamabad instead of to Washington.

This was in line with India ’s consistent stand contrary to Pakistan ’s earlier approach that Indo-Pak ties should be bilateral without third party intervention. After Barkha Dutt and Absar Alam rubbished Mir’s claims the latter confessed that Sharif made no criticism of the PM. He lamely tried to explain away his contradicted version by saying that Sharif spoke in jest. But why did not Mir say this in his original comment on TV? In that remark he even indicated that Sharif considered Manmohan Singh weak and was looking forward to doing business with his successor after 2014.

One will not speculate whether all this happened by coincidence or by design, and if by design, the inspiration of these incidents. Hamid Mir is a powerful and influential TV journalist in Pakistan. Currently there are differences between the Pakistan army and the civil government over how to tackle the Taliban. Nawaz Sharif is seeking a dialogue. The army wants to continue with the status quo by “fighting” the Taliban. Mir sympathized with the army by stating:

“It’s a very complicated situation. The army does not seem to be in the mood for talks as it has gained a lot of ground against the Taliban in the recent past.”

Mir should know. He has after all excellent contacts. He was in fact the last journalist to interview slain Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin laden in Afghanistan in 2002. It is difficult to believe that he could have accomplished this without the clearance, if not cooperation, of the ISI.

In summation, Rahul Gandhi, Narendra Modi and Hamid Mir all passed comments that could have damaged the PM’s US visit. Large sections of big business electronic media and the opposition joined them. Modi and Gandhi are repeatedly projected by the media as the two contenders for becoming prime minister. It is ironic that both contenders are on the same side insofar as the PM’s negotiations in the US were concerned. It is also intriguing that these three fed on each other’s narrative to rubbish the PM. But then, this does not necessarily suggest collusion. It could be pure coincidence. As for big business that funds both media and politics it may matter little which contender becomes PM. Heads I win, tails you lose!

For big business Modi and Gandhi might well be two sides of the same coin. But beyond business interests of the corporate sector there are also powerful international forces interested in damaging relations between India and the US , as well as between India and Pakistan . Now which international forces would be pleased if Indo-US and Indo-Pak elations deteriorated? It is for readers to ponder and arrive at their own conclusions.

Image (c) ibnlive.in.com

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

The great Congress mystery! Sep

30

      4 Votes

There is a mystery related to the functioning of the Congress party that nobody I have asked has been able to clear. The latest episode heightens the mystery. The Union cabinet along with the core group of the Congress party in the presence and with the consent of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi approved the draft of the Ordinance to protect criminal MPs. After the Ordinance was presented to the President he expressed doubts about its legality and delayed signing it. Meanwhile the opposition mounted a blistering attack against the Ordinance. Cabinet ministers and Congress party leaders stoutly defended the Ordinance and accused the opposition of being complicit in the decision to draft the Bill protecting criminal MPs.

Then Congress Vice President Mr. Rahul Gandhi without notice intervened in a Congress press conference and condemned the Ordinance in very strong and intemperate language. He did this while the PM was abroad about to hold very crucial meetings with several heads of states. The timing of Mr. Gandhi’s remarks was so significant that had he not been a leader of such limited understanding one might have concluded that he was representing a hostile foreign power seeking to damage India ’s foreign policy.

After Mr. Gandhi spoke the cabinet ministers and Congress party leaders instead of criticizing his performance somersaulted and fell in line making nonsense of their own earlier publicly stated remarks. This writer has never in his long career seen such a craven display of sycophancy and lack of self respect and honour as long as can be remembered.

Here then is the mystery. What is the secret of Mrs. Gandhi’s hold on all members of the Congress party? She cannot get votes. Her party is performing badly even in her own constituency despite campaigning by her and her family members. She has been accused by credible international sources of receiving illegal funds from foreign sources. She has been accused by credible international sources of having a secret illegal foreign bank account. She has never taken the trouble to deny charges. She has not displayed any significant expertise related to economic, foreign or political policy. Her son, Mr. Rahul Gandhi, is even less accomplished than her. There are serious and credible allegations of his having been detained in the US possessing unaccounted money and drugs and subsequently being released through intervention of the Indian government.

Despite all this, Congress party members from top to bottom behave like craven slaves of mother and son. One cannot fathom the reason for this. One would like to be enlightened. In conclusion this writer would like to clarify that he is not critical mainly of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi or Mr. Rahul Gandhi. They look after their interests as all people are expected to. It is the members of the Congress party that attract the strongest possible criticism. So obnoxious and counter productive is their conduct that it strengthens this writer’s belief that the Congress party must be buried in order to preserve Indian democracy.

Share this:

5 Comments

Posted in Nation

Kashmir exposures Convert crisis into opportunity! Sep

27

      1 Vote

Government should not overspend effort to undo the political damage inflicted by the recent leaked allegations by the Ministry of Defence and General VK Singh. The damage to India’s case in Kashmir cannot be undone. Just days after the recent disclosure terrorists have struck in Jammu to kill army and police personnel. More attacks should be expected by terrorists emboldened by the disclosures vindicating their allegations. Politics is about perception of facts and not about facts themselves. The recent disclosures have confirmed in the public mind all the perceived truths about India’s relationship with Kashmir repeatedly articulated by separatists and many other foreign powers. The government should instead seize the moment to convert a setback into opportunity and settle once and for all the Kashmir dispute that has bedeviled the subcontinent’s peace since Independence.

However, in order to attempt that the government must be honest enough to confront the truth and bold enough to dare an initiative.

What is the truth?

One need no iterate the oft repeated facts relating to the Kashmir dispute. Kashmir is not the problem but the symptom of the problem. The problem is the Partition. Kashmir was a state with contiguous borders with both India and Pakistan. The Hindu ruler of this Muslim majority state wanted independence and good relations with both nations. The attack by Pakistani raiders backed by its army to forcibly seize Kashmir forced the ruler’s hands. He acceded to India in order to obtain the Indian army’s help to repulse the enemy.

As Kashmir Chief Minister Mr. Omar Abdullah pointed out recently, Kashmir unlike other princely states of the Indian Union did not merge with India but stopped short after accession. That is why it has a special status and Article 370. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru at the time of accepting Kashmir’s instrument of accession stated that it was “subject to the will of the people of Kashmir”. This was followed by India’s acceptance of the UN Resolution regarding Plebiscite in Kashmir. For over six decades stupid policies pursued by the governments of India and Pakistan, both acting like foreign pawns, has denied the region peace and stability. The distorted approach of both governments that have behaved like Raja Jaichand and Mir Jafar to ally with foreigners against their own flesh and blood has its roots in the Partition.

Britain offered the opportunity to keep India united by presenting the Cabinet Mission Plan that would have created a federation. Jinnah accepted the proposal. Nehru rejected it because the Plan allowed the Muslim dominated units to secede after 10 years if they so wished. Like pathetic colonial minions the leaders of India and Pakistan accepted Independence and Partition without the borders of the new nations determined. Immediately after Independence, accompanied by Partition, riots engineered by interested foreign powers to perpetuate the division cost a million lives within a few months. Similarly the engineered Kashmir dispute led to the partition of the state in order to create a permanent bone of contention that would prevent reunification.

Nehru, who had rejected the Cabinet Mission Plan and a confederation when these were offered, attempted before his death to undo the spirit of the Partition by creating an Indo-Pakistan confederation. In 1959 President Ayub Khan offered joint defence that would have automatically led to a confederation. But the same President Ayub Khan rejected Nehru’s proposal of a confederation presented by Sheikh Abdullah which Jinnah had accepted at the time of the Cabinet Mission Plan. In other words, both India and Pakistan had wanted confederation. But they had wanted it at different times. Therefore they cannot agree. Is this not shocking diplomacy? The absence of statesmanship displayed by leaders of both governments and their readiness to serve foreign interests could not be more glaring.

The latest revelations by the Indian government and General VK Singh have made prospects of reconciliation ever more remote. Peace will come only if the leaders of India and Pakistan are bold enough to cut the Gordian knot and make a dramatic breakthrough. Critics have opposed the proposed meeting between the Prime Ministers of India and Pakistan scheduled for September 29 in New York. BJP leader and former foreign minister Mr. Yashwant Sinha has stated that such a meeting is premature as long as terrorism continues. He suggested that lower officials should first meet. One begs to differ. Even if lower officials meet and people to people contacts continue for a hundred years there will be no progress.

The problem is the trust deficit. That exists between governments and not between peoples. That exists because the armies of both nations are in contention. Only joint defence and operations to wipe out terrorism from the region will remove the trust deficit. There are more victims of terrorism in Pakistan than in India. Prime Minister Mr. Manmohan Singh should bluntly tell Mr. Nawaz Sharif on September 29 that enough is enough. Unless the armies of both nations cooperate there cannot be peace and stability in the region. If even now, when both nations are besieged by terrorism and instability, their governments cannot act rationally, they never will. Without joint defence the trust deficit cannot be removed. If there is joint defence it must inevitably lead to some form of confederation. Both leaders should read the writing on the wall. They should forget what their critics might say today. They should focus on what historians will say tomorrow.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Politicians, Army, playing with fire! Sep

25

      1 Vote

General VK Singh reportedly has decided to file an application with the Right to Information (RTI) commission seeking a copy of General Vinod Bhatia’s secret report on the alleged misuse of the top secret Technical Support Division (TSD) during his tenure as Army Chief. Will the government respond by releasing the secret report? After news of the report appeared in the media the government stated that the report “impinges on matters of national security and, as such, the government will take a decision and further actions after careful examination.” If the contents of the report impinge on national security it is difficult to see how the government can agree to release the report.

However, then a further question is raised. If the report will not be released to the public how was it allowed to be leaked to the media? After the media exposure the government did not deny the report or displayed reticence but went out of its way to acknowledge its contents and resolved to probe the affair. One spokesperson of the Congress party blithely informed TV that since the media had obtained the report the matter had to be fully probed. But the government has not addressed the obvious question of how the media obtained the report. From all accounts it has not ordered an inquiry into who leaked the report and taken steps to punish the guilty. The circumstantial evidence of the government itself leaking the report is compelling. In the pursuit of petty partisan politics was the government oblivious of the grave implications that might flow from the leakage?

That is not all. Politicians further endangered the situation. BJP President Mr. Rajnath Singh defended General VK Singh and charged the UPA government with targeting him because he shared a platform with Mr. Narendra Modi. The Punjab Congress was quick to retaliate. Captain Amarinder Singh reiterated the allegation in the report that General VK Singh had misused TSD to attempt scuttling the appointment of the current Army Chief General Bikram Singh. He challenged Punjab Chief Minister Mr. Prakash Singh Badal to clarify his stand since he was supporting the BJP and Mr. Narendra Modi.

Have India ’s politicians gone stark raving mad? In the pursuit of their stupid and petty rivalries they are creating a situation that could encourage polarization between Hindu and Sikh, between Haryana and Punjab . Whatever the truth of real or imagined differences between army generals, these might be based upon entirely professional grounds. But in public perception the differences could most likely be seen as between communities and states. If such perception is allowed to grow, how will it affect all the ranks in the army?

The TSD unit was conceived and created after the 26/11 terrorist attack in Mumbai. The purpose of this top secret unit was to counter terrorism. Now not only the existence of this top secret unit is blown, but efforts are actually being made to reveal its operations and functioning in order to settle political scores. The most far reaching consequences of this sorry episode might well be General VK Singh rebuttal of the allegations against him publicized by the government. In an interview to Times Now TV channel he furnished damaging details of how the army has been operating in Jammu and Kashmir for the past many decades. His revelations make mockery of India ’s official stand on Kashmir.

One can imagine how gleefully members of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) in China and the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) in Pakistan would be with rapt attention watching the unfolding exposure of the functioning of India’s top secret army unit established to counter terrorism.

Share this:

1 Comment

Posted in Nation

Has Government committed treason? Sep

22

      2 Votes

Not surprisingly the controversy created by the media exposure and its subsequent official confirmation of the alleged misuse of the Technical Services Division (TSD) by former Army Chief General VK Singh is expected to snowball into a major national crisis. But the crisis may not evolve as those who leaked the information might imagine. According to The Indian Express that published the report General Singh had conveyed a warning that if they went ahead and published it “they will get it in the neck”. General Singh reportedly told the Press Trust of India (PTI) news agency that anyone recommending a probe into the functioning of TSD was being nonsensical because its operations were meant to be secret.

General Singh might have enlightened the public a little more. The mere fact that the inquiry into the functioning of TSD was “secret” suggests that the TSD operation was not only secret but probably “top secret”. If that is the case the consequences for the government as well as for media outlets utilized by the government could be very serious. In that event even the existence of TSD should never have been publicized. Further, if there is exposure of the actual working of the top secret unit, leaking information about it may well be considered treasonable under law, regardless of whether infromation is true or false. It involves national security. Such information can help the nation’s enemies. Even knowledge of the existence of TSD can help the nation’s enemies.

Did the government factor this aspect into its calculations before rushing to the media with its leaks? The last on this issue has not been heard. Events thus far may be in fact just the start of a crisis that could traumatize the system.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

President, army and governance! Sep

21

      1 Vote

According to media reports the Defence Ministry constituted a secret Board of Officers body headed by Lt General Vinod Bhatia to probe alleged irregularities committed during the tenure of former Army Chief General VK Singh. It is alleged that General Singh set up a controversial Military Intelligence unit, Technical Services Division (TSD) that misused secret funds to conduct unauthorized covert operations that interfered in domestic politics. According to reports General Bhatia has advised a fuller probe by an external agency like the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The report alleges that TDS misused secret funds in an effort to destabilize the Jammu and Kashmir government, as well as block the promotion of the present Army Chief General Bikram Singh. The media report has furnished details about how these irregularities were sought to be accomplished.

This report was played up as a first page banner in The Indian Express, and appeared as an unobtrusive single column in the inside pages of The Times of India. The Express claims that it tried unsuccessfully to contact General VK Singh but managed to interact through a mutual contact that quoted the General to say that the report was rubbish and the government was motivated by the fact that he had shared a public platform with opposition leader Mr. Narendra Modi. General Bhatia had submitted his report to the Defence Ministry in March this year. This is an amazing episode and offers glaring evidence of how deeply governance and responsibility to preserve national security have sunk. The following questions need to be addressed.

First, now that the report has been quoted in the media it has to be established whether the allegations leveled by General Bhatia’s team of officers are valid. If true it reveals a shocking state of affairs in which a serving Army Chief can so misuse his powers to further political ends unconnected to his call of duty. If untrue, it reveals an equally shocking state of affairs in which politics has infected the armed forces to allow such false and motivated allegations to be made in order to settle differences within the Defence Ministry. Secondly, the report was submitted in March. Why has it surfaced only now almost six months later after the Defence Minister reportedly has got into the act? Does this validate General Singh’s reported comment that he is being targeted only because he shared a public platform with Mr. Narendra Modi? Thirdly, if it be assumed that the report has substance surely there are various discreet methods of addressing the issue, of even indirectly punishing the guilty, and keep the controversy away from public attention?

Transparency in governance is an excellent principle and the media cannot be criticized for playing up the report when offered the chance. But does it behoove a government to throw all considerations of national security to the winds and jeopardize it by publicizing such an episode if indeed it occurred as alleged? What kind of government is ruling India , and what kind of priorities does it have?

Finally, one cannot but reflect once again whether there can ever be accountability in our collapsing democracy unless the President discharges the responsibilities assigned to his post by our Constitution. It is weeks since communal riots exposed the failure of law and order in Uttar Pradesh. Every single party spokesperson has demanded that the government be dismissed. Official spokespersons of the Congress have said that law and order has collapsed. Yet the central government remains a mute spectator although it claims that the rule of law has collapsed in the state. Neither the Prime Minister nor the President has taken a single tiny step to introduce Governor’s rule. The latest episode related to the TSD report has grave implications for the state of affairs in our armed forces as well as for national security. The President as the Supreme Commander of the armed forces is directly responsible to safeguard both. Will he still remain mute?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Modi’s poll campaign error! Sep

19

      Rate This

From all accounts Mr. Narendra Modi’s inaugural campaign rally in Rewari after being anointed Prime Ministerial candidate of the BJP was the largest ever seen in the district. In some of his earlier rallies also common people had flocked to his meetings with great enthusiasm. Obviously, in addition to the formidable publicity and mobilization organized by the RSS and powerful business interests supporting Mr. Modi, certain qualities of his persona too have caught the imagination of the masses. This has been seized by political analysts and his party’s leaders to describe Mr. Modi as the first great national Other Backward Classes (OBC) leader who might become Prime Minister. Media analysts may be forgiven for their ignorance of political ground realities to describe Mr. Modi as a national OBC leader. But surely the poll managers of the BJP ought to have known better?

It is a grievous flaw to describe Mr. Modi as a national OBC icon. Not only are BJP leaders assiduously promoting this image, even Mr. Modi himself seems to have become victim of this flawed propaganda. Mr. Modi belongs to the Ghanchi caste found only in the state of Gujarat . It is a sub-caste in the OBC category. People belonging to the Teli caste in other states may empathize with the Ghanchi caste because of a shared occupational history related to extraction of oil. Otherwise the Ghanchi caste will have little relevance outside Gujarat . Belonging to the Ghanchi caste makes Mr. Modi an OBC leader. It does not make him a national icon of OBC voters. There is no national OBC icon. There cannot be a national OBC icon. There can only be a national icon who is an OBC. The distinction should be appreciated.

The very logic of caste identity runs counter to a nationwide OBC identity. Caste mobilization becomes easy precisely because the approach is tribal. Caste leaders often unite to make common cause. That makes it easy and convenient for the big business corporate sector to use money power to split or align political forces to suit their interest. But when have castes en block voted for a leader belonging to another caste because of his OBC status? Why do not the Kurmis in Bihar vote for Mr. Laloo Yadav, or the Yadavs vote for Mr. Nitish Kumar? Before Mr. Modi became his party’s election campaign chief the BJP had already laid the ground for positive poll results in UP after Mr. Rajnath Singh brought back Mr. Kalyan Singh into his party’s fold. The revived Thakur-Kurmi alliance had earlier brought the BJP its largest ever parliamentry tally of 57 MPs. With Miss Uma Bharati entering UP politics, in addition to her oratory expected to consolidate the Hindutva vote bank, she will also undoubtedly attract Lodh voters belonging to her caste.

Yet media analysts and BJP poll managers are busy trying to exploit Mr. Modi’s OBC status to project him as the first great OBC national leader who might become Prime Minister. Unfortunately, Mr. Modi has bought this flawed approach. Celebrating his birthday recently in Gujarat Mr. Modi reached out and invited many OBC leaders of the organized and unorganized sectors to his function. National thinking has become so corrupted and distorted by the caste reservation policy and mobilization of quick vote banks that an obvious truth escaped media analysts as well as the poll campaign managers of the BJP. If enthusiastic masses have flocked to Mr. Modi’s rallies it is not because he is a national OBC icon. It is because people have recognized that Mr. Modi has risen from very humble origins like themselves to acquire a national political status. If the masses empathize with Mr. Modi it is not because he is an OBC but because he was poor and is now powerful.

The flawed approach adopted by Mr. Modi and the BJP regarding the importance of his OBC status can have very far reaching consequences. It will determine what kind of Indian will emerge tomorrow if Mr. Modi does become Prime Minister. On his birthday Mr. Modi invited OBC leaders belonging to the organized and unorganized sectors of labour. OBC leaders can mobilize votes. That is an understandably attractive attribute. But so can union leaders of organized and unorganized labour mobilize voters. Why could not Mr. Modi have focused on them instead? Does Mr. Modi seek an India of his dreams symbolized by his proposed Statue of Unity to consolidate on the prevalent national divisive culture based upon over 4000 contending castes battling for economic crumbs?

Or does he seek to create a new Indian with a national identity above caste and community ready to confront the 21st century world? Will he support caste-based reservation or economic criteria for job and educational reservation? Will he promote universal compulsory primary education to lift all castes from poverty? These are some questions that Mr. Modi and the leaders of the BJP need to ponder if they seek a genuine political change. They have to decide whether they want victory in the present or a victory for the future. Do they want to cater to India of the present or to India of the future that will belong to the young?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Modi’s proposed Statue of Unity! Sep

17

      1 Vote

Concluding his first public rally in Rewari after being anointed Prime Ministerial candidate of the BJP, Mr. Narendra Modi appealed to his audience to donate pieces of iron from each village in the state to be used for constructing his proposed Statue of Unity on the sea coast of Gujarat . Mr. Modi wants similar donations of iron pieces from each village in each state across the nation in honour of Sardar Vallabhai Patel who will symbolize unity in the proposed statue. Mr. Modi has declared his intention of constructing the tallest statue in the world, taller than America ’s Statue of Liberty, in honour of Sardar Patel.

This writer has serious objection to the proposal. Sardar Patel was undoubtedly a very great man, as were Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru. Patel performed great service to the nation by unifying the princely states of India after Independence . But though these great leaders did great things for the nation they also committed unforgivable errors the consequence of which continue to haunt our nation. These leaders, mainly Sardar Patel, united Bharat but they divided India . They divided India without the slightest justification. They divided India because they allowed themselves to be influenced and manipulated by the British.

With just over 1000 people killed in Punjab through communal riots engineered by the British administration immediately after Lord Mountbatten became India ’s Viceroy, and about 12000 killed in Bihar and Bengal over a period of two years, these leaders violated their solemn pledge to the people of India by accepting Partition. Gandhi on the fateful day, June 3, 1947 when the Congress formally accepted Partition, conveniently observed his ‘day of silence’. Nehru and Patel were the hawks in the Congress Working Committee in favour of accepting Partition. JB Kripalani, Jayaprakash Narain and Ram Manohar Lohia who opposed Partition were overruled by the rest. On June 2, on eve of the decision, Gandhi assured Mountbatten who visited him that he would not create any hurdles against the decision.

In what manner then might Sardar Patel symbolize unity? After two lawyers from Gujarat, Gandhi and Jinnah, and two aristocrats from Uttar Pradesh, Nehru and Liaquat Ali, butchered and cut asunder Punjab and Bengal displaying their ignorance about the ground realities in these states, people today should display some sensitivity towards the sentiments of provinces where over a million people were slaughtered and over ten million rendered homeless due to the follies of these leaders. In case critics challenge this view about the unforgivable decision about the Partition, let them note that both Gandhi and Nehru acknowledged their error. Gandhi wanted to settle down in Pakistan to undo the Partition just before he was assassinated thanks to ignored security measures during Sardar Patel’s tenure as Home Minister. Nehru sent Sheikh Abdullah to Pakistan to plead with President Ayub Khan to reunite India and Pakistan through a proposed confederation during which effort he died.

Therefore this writer would like to remind Mr. Narendra Modi and many others from different parts of India that they may have their history and may choose to honour whom they wish. The peoples of Punjab and Bengal have their own history and their own memories to recall. Congress leaders today may be the best in the land. They are welcome to govern India . But the Congress Party as Imperial Britain’s instrument to partition India deserves to be buried. Let Congress leaders reinvent themselves into a new organization. After all, this demand merely echoes the last wish of the most revered Congress icon, Mahatma Gandhi, on the day before he died.

Mr. Modi is welcome to construct his Statue of Unity. The people of Punjab and Bengal might seek their own way of responding to history. Human folly can delay but not derail history. Ultimately, cultural nationalism will triumph.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Profit & Loss of UP riots! Sep

14

      Rate This

All political parties and media outlets seem agreed that the recent Muzzafarnagar riots which cost 40 lives and brought untold misery to thousands who fled their homes, were the result of a conspiracy. But all seem to disagree about who was behind the conspiracy. The UP government was suspiciously lax in acting on warnings issued by the central government months earlier. Inexplicably it allowed a Jat mahapanchayat of 1.5 lakh people just 20 km from Muzaffarnagar in violation of prohibitory orders in force in the entire district due to prevailing tension. Thousands of vehicles and tractors from Haryana, Delhi and the neighbouring districts of UP were allowed to descend on the venue of the mahapanchayat. One UP minister has acknowledged that there was an administrative lapse. Samajwadi Party (SP) leader Mr. Mulayam Singh was at pains to stress that the riots were not communal but ethnic – between Jats and Muslims. Chief Minister Mr. Akhilesh Yadav has accused other political parties for the conspiracy.

The UP administration has charged that a five minute fake video was used to fan violence. One BJP leader has been arrested in connection with that video. The district administration of Muzafarnagar lodged criminal cases against a senior BJP leader and former minister along with three other BJP leaders for violating the prohibitory order and allegedly delivered provocative speeches during the Jat mahapanchayat. The BJP leaders have denied charges. Leaders of the Bharat Kisan Union (BKU) and the Congress were also charged on similar grounds. Allegations and counter allegations of conspiracy to instigate the riots flew thick and fast between the BJP, SP, Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) and Congress. However, it is futile to speculate who was behind the conspiracy. It is futile to speculate that if there was indeed a conspiracy, whether it was the work of individual politicians or was it sanctioned by their respective political organizations. What can be assessed with some accuracy is the political impact of riots. Which party gained, and which party lost?

The SP is a huge loser. It is likely to lose its Muslim vote which is vital for its electoral success. Had Muzzafarnagar limited itself to communal tension the SP would have gained. That explains the seemingly deliberate administrative dereliction of duty. The Muslims of West UP who supported Mr. Ajit Singh’s Rashtriya Lok DaL (RLD) might have been weaned away to support SP. But things got out of hand. The Jat mahapanchayat was followed by horrendous riots. The government’s failure has left the Muslim community bitter and alienated.

The BSP could be a gainer. The first Muslim priority as of present is to remove this government. In the assembly elections the BSP offers the best chance of doing it. Similarly the Congress could be a gainer. For parliamentary elections the Muslim vote will attempt to block the BJP. On present reckoning the Congress provides the only hope of accomplishing that.

The BJP is the biggest gainer. Notwithstanding Mr. Mulayam Singh’s nitpicking distinction between communal riots and ethnic riots, the accession of the Jat vote to the BJP, along with widespread communal polarization following the riots across the state, could provide a huge boost to BJP prospects.

The RLD is the biggest loser. The traditional harmony between Muslims and Jats carefully nurtured by the late Choudhary Charan Singh rendered West UP a solid base for the RLD. That harmony has been shattered. The cost of this division will be very heavy. It could destroy the dream of carving a new state of Harit Pradesh in West UP. Both the Jats and the Muslims yearned for it. The Muslims are one third of the population in the region. The Deoband centre of religious learning is in the region. The destruction of the fine balance between Jats and Muslims may be irreparable for a long time. Both communities may now repent at leisure.

It is in this cynical way that politicians will calculate the outcome of the Muzzafarnagar riots. They will not spare a thought for the heartrending tragedy befallen to innocent women and children. Their crime was that they belonged to a community. Their weakness was that they were poor. Their tragedy was that they lived in a country where politics is conducted by a cynical, cruel and corrupt class of leaders.

Share this:

1 Comment

Posted in Nation

Modified Modi! Sep

12

      2 Votes

According to media reports the BJP will formally anoint Mr. Narendra Modi as its Prime Ministerial candidate when the party’s parliamentary board meeting is held on Friday. Some time earlier the view had been expressed in these columns that there was no substantive difference between Prime Minister Mr. Manmohan Singh and Mr. Narendra Modi insofar as approach to economic policy was concerned. Both leaders seem to be focused mainly on quick growth based upon foreign investment and delivery of maximum facilities to the big corporate sector.

However, this writer deemed Mr. Modi superior because he was described as a “muscular” version of the Prime Minister. In Gujarat he offered quicker and smoother delivery to big business than the Prime Minister could at the centre. The reason was simple. There was no extra constitutional authority to derail and slow down Mr. Modi in Gujarat as the office of the National Advisory Council did to the Prime Minister in Delhi . The Prime Minister was helpless. He was appointed by Mrs. Sonia Gandhi and had to function under her direction. It was thought that Mr. Modi would have no such fetters to implement the economic model in which the Prime Minister reposed his faith. That view it seems was too hasty. Mr. Modi may in fact be no more muscular than the Prime Minister.

Recent events should leave no doubt that if Mr. Modi is declared as the BJP’s Prime Ministerial candidate it will be only due to the pressure exerted by the RSS on the party. The RSS has appointed Mr. Modi as the party’s Prime Ministerial candidate and left it to the party to announce the decision. Mr. Modi cannot be unaware of the crucial RSS support needed for his elevation. The support reportedly was promised after extended parleys and eventually the decision was taken after agreement was reached on the minimum demands conveyed by the RSS. According to media reports the four conditions set by the RSS for Mr. Modi to receive support were to pledge building a grand Ram Temple in Ayodhya, to enforce the contentious Uniform Civil Code across the country, to repeal of Article 370 in J&K and end the special status of the state, and to press for full protection of cows. All four conditions reflect policies of traditional Hindutva.

However, the merits or otherwise of the policies insisted upon by the RSS are not important. What is significant is that the RSS is insistent upon the implementation of its agenda. Like Mrs. Sonia Gandhi choosing Mr. Manmohan Singh as Prime Minister, the RSS has chosen Mr. Modi as its candidate. But unlike Mrs. Gandhi who established her National Advisory Council to offer policy directives to the government after Mr. Manmohan Singh assumed office, Mr. Mohan Bhagwat has not wasted time. He has already laid down the minimum policy agenda. This is just the start.

Many more policy directives should be expected if Mr. Modi does indeed become Prime Minister. Although Mr. Modi therefore may not prove to be a more muscular version of Mr. Manmohan Singh, constrained as he will be by an extra constitutional body, Mr. Mohan Bhagwat certainly is showing signs of being a much more muscular version of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi. This aspect needs to be considered carefully by all the supporters of Mr. Modi. It should be amply clear that apart from support by members of the public Mr. Modi is heavily backed by the most powerful big business corporate sector. Apart from Mr. Modi’s own undoubted attributes, his popularity depends heavily on the massive support rendered to him by the big business electronic media. There is nothing surprising about that. Big business will protect its own interests. But a serious question arises.

Many supporters of Mr. Modi draw comfort from the fact that he has not personally referred to any of the pro-Hindu policies associated with the hardcore Hindutva elements of the RSS. These supporters are being delusional. They betray their ignorance about how politics is played out. The approval of every action and every statement by any of the sources in the BJP will devolve on Mr. Modi as the election campaign in charge. His silence is meaningless. Silence will be taken as assent. If Mr. Modi disapproves of any policy or statement by members of his party he will have to contradict them publicly to record his dissent. Voters are influenced by whole parties and not by their perception of any one individual, however powerful or charismatic.

What should be clear therefore to all supporters of Mr. Modi, especially the powerful big business elements, is that the RSS agenda must be factored in their calculations. This is because Mr. Modi and RSS will be inseparable if he becomes the Prime Minister. There will be nothing wrong with that if Mr. Modi and the RSS see eye to eye on all policy matters. If on the other hand Mr. Modi’s personal predilection is at variance from the RSS, there could be a very serious problem. In that event Mr. Modi’s government could become as paralyzed as Mr. Manmohan Singh’s government. There would be precisely the same kind of diarchy in governance as paralyzed the UPA government. The paralysis in the UPA government became so palpable that even Congress General Secretary Mr. Digvijay Singh was constrained to acknowledge publicly that the existing system of diarchy was undesirable.

The powerful vested interests favouring Mr. Modi should therefore carefully scrutinize the total RSS agenda in order to continue their support. This applies to all the international big business executives who descended from Europe and South America to endorse Mr. Modi, to all the young Indians who seek a modern twenty-first century nation and look up to Mr. Modi, to all the biggest business houses in the nation who are solidly backing Mr. Modi, and to all the mainstream media TV anchors who swoon with excitement each time Mr. Modi sneezes. It is entirely possible of course that the RSS policies may exceed their wildest dreams of promoting economic growth and progress in India . But that is a prospect it would be more prudent for them to assess now instead of later. What needs to be understood is that either Mr. Modi is totally supportive of RSS policies, or if he is not, there are prospects once again of paralyzing diarchy that could ruin governance in India.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Post navigation← Older posts

Media’s response to Pak Envoy! Oct

9

      1 Vote

During a press interview to a foreign journalist President Pranab Mukherjee said that even if cross border terrorism was perpetrated by non-state actors as Islamabad claimed, the Pakistan government could not evade responsibility. The territory was under the jurisdiction of the government, the President pointed out. “Non-state actors do not descend from heaven,

” he said. This view was echoed by Information and Broadcasting (I&B) Minister Mr. Manish Tewari who told media that the crossing over by terrorists and non-state actors suggested either complicity or negligence by the Pakistan government. “Obviously these terrorists or non-state actors are not coming out of a vacuum,”

he said.

The Pakistan High Commissioner to India Mr. Salman Bashir gave a veiled rejoinder to these remarks. But he focused his criticism mainly against the media. He accused the media of focusing exclusively on “so-called” incursions and infiltrations from across the border.

He said:

“Whoever is making the argument that they have not descended from heaven, I want to ask who are these thousands of people who are involved in heinous acts of terrorism in Pakistan . Have they descended from heaven? We agree they have not descended from heaven, from where are they being funded and sourced?”

One can appreciate the constraints under which Pakistan ’s official envoy to India has to function. Mr. Bashir said something, and he implied something. Both his assertion and implication deserve attention. Since he thought it fit to direct his ire against the Indian media this writer takes the liberty of directly responding to his criticism.

Mr. Bashir cannot blame the Indian media of responding to continued incursions from across the border which for diplomatic compulsions he described as “so-called”. But he was right to point out the failure of the Indian government as well as the media to adequately differentiate between the government and non-state actors in Pakistan . Mr. Bashir has rightly asserted that “thousands of terrorists” are operating against Pakistan who obviously did not descend from heaven. By implication this is tacit admission of failure of the Pakistan government. It is a fact that there are substantially more victims of terrorism in Pakistan than in India including in the state of J&K. Then Mr. Bashir went on to question the source of funding and training of these terrorists. His central plea was for the enhancement of cooperation between Islamabad and New Delhi.

He said:

“We have evidence which we have shared and are prepared to share with the rest of the world and particularly with the government of India on fuelling of acts of terrorism in Pakistan .”

Mr. Bashir’s plea for greater cooperation between India and Pakistan to fight terror clearly indicates that by questioning the source of terror funding he was not pointing a finger at India . He was obviously indicating the hand of Al Qaeda which inspires global terrorism. In the light of the reality of terrorist activity in Pakistan funded and directed by global forces the Indian government is clearly remiss in not taking an initiative for closer cooperation with Pakistan to combat terror. New Delhi ’s inhibition may be explained by its continued doubts about how deeply subverted Pakistan ’s security establishment is by pro-terror elements. Well, the Indian media has no such inhibitions. Since Mr. Bashir squarely blamed the Indian media I take the liberty of directly addressing him. I put a question to the Pakistan government through him that the Indian government has failed to do.

Mr. Bashir you seek closer cooperation between India and Pakistan , you admit that there are thousands of terrorists operating inside Pakistan . You indicate that they are funded and directed from abroad. You tacitly imply though you do not state that they cannot operate without help from a section of the official machinery. I agree with your overall analysis. My question is: Will the Pakistan government accept an offer of joint intelligence and joint operations against terror to wipe out these non-state actors from both our countries?

I know that you may not deign to respond to such a question from a mere media person instead of from the government. But let me assure you. If you do answer the media will compel the Indian government to respond appropriately.

So will you respond?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

The President’s curious priorities! Oct

8

      1 Vote

After the media pointed out that the credit for the rollback of the Ordinance on convicted MPs went to President Pranab Mukherjee and not to Congress Vice-President Rahul Gandhi who exploited the President’s known reluctance to sign it, Mr. LK Advani praised the President for his decision. However, the President reacted to this praise most curiously. The President with uncalled for modesty went out of his way to dissociate himself from the decision to roll back the Ordinance. It is known that he sat over the Ordinance and was reluctant to sign it. By signing it he could have possibly attracted strictures from the Supreme Court to make his position untenable. Understandably he mulled over the matter and shared his views with UPA Ministers who called on him to discuss the Ordinance. It was after that when Mr. Rahul Gandhi jumped into the controversy to corner credit. Mr. Advani’s praise for the President therefore was a routine and unexceptionable observation.

However the President reacted to the media in response to such praise by saying:

“I cannot comment on what the Opposition has said about my role. My duties are now completely determined by the Indian Constitution.”

The praise for the President was precisely because he did follow the Constitution by not immediately signing the Ordinance. Why, then, his curiously defensive rejoinder? Eyebrows were further raised after the President’s son, Mr. Abhijeet Mukherjee, called on the chief victim of the scrapped Ordinance, Mr. Lalu Prasad Yadav, who was in jail. The popular conclusion derived from this visit was that Mr. Mukherjee had gone there to convince Mr. Yadav that the decision not to sign the Ordinance reflected no personal motive of the President but was dictated by the Constitution. This was unnecessary. Mr. Yadav one is sure is sufficiently knowledgeable to have been aware of that. If such speculation has any basis it is certainly odd that the President should be so concerned about Mr. Yadav’s feelings. The President after all is above party politics.

Alas, it does not seem that the President is as much above party politics as he should be. His continued silence over the horrendous events in Andhra is equally mystifying. After the Union government hastily declared the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh by ceding the new state of Telangana despite the state assembly being overwhelmingly opposed to the measure, the entire state is in flames. Apart from mammoth public protest and indefinite fasts launched by politicians, the whole state is without electric power because of a strike by workers. And this situation has been growing and worsening for days. Has not the Constitutional machinery in the state collapsed to necessitate the application of Article 356 to impose President’s rule in Andhra to restore order? But the Prime Minister and the Union cabinet are mute.

Surprisingly, even the President is silent. Article 78 (b) of the Constitution states: “It shall be the duty of the Prime Minister to furnish such information relating to the administration of the affairs of the Union and proposals for legislation as the President may call for.” Should not the President invoke this Article and initiate action? Surely the millions of agitated people in Andhra Pradesh deserve as much attention as Mr. Lalu Yadav should get?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Snooping, security and privacy! Oct

5

      1 Vote

After Julian Assange and the Wikileaks controversy it is the Edgar Snowden affair that has rocked the world. Snowden was a government contractor working at the National Security Agency (NSA) in America. The NSA in order to protect the US snoops on citizens in America and abroad looking for terrorist connections. The NSA collects and analyses foreign communication and foreign signals of intelligence in order to protect the US. In an interview in Hong Kong Snowden leaked top-secret government surveillance programs that led to an international debate over national security versus individual privacy. In a recent statement to the European Parliament Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Snowden said:

“A culture of secrecy has denied our societies the opportunity to determine the appropriate balance between the human right of privacy and the governmental interest in investigation.”

Among Snowden’s leaks was information about secret US surveillance of foreign governments including Brazil and India. The Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff in protest lashed out at the US in the UN General Assembly and canceled her official visit to Washington. Critics in India not only criticized the US but berated the Indian government after disclosures that it had also like America and China snooped on citizens.

Whatever the extent of public outrage over official snooping, it will not and cannot stop. The world needs a reality check. As long as terrorism survives in the world and weapons of mass destruction can be manufactured by private citizens in a garage, surveillance is a survival imperative for governments. What is required is that such surveillance by all governments be monitored and controlled by the UN.

Technology has not only enabled private citizens to manufacture weapons of mass destruction, but also to snoop on governments and citizens alike. In the foreseeable future therefore privacy cannot be guaranteed for any citizen or government. In the event is it not prudent for people to adjust to the new reality? In other words technology will render total transparency for governments and private citizens unavoidable. It will signify a game changing new culture for mankind. Should not people therefore start adjusting to this change and make their lives totally transparent? It may lead to a happier and safer world.

Indeed, there could well be advantages in being snooped upon! While many people criticize the government’s snooping policy, so do I but for different reasons. My complaint is that the government does not bug my telephone, hack my computer or bug my regular haunts where I have coffee sessions with friends. I want to be heard but nobody listens. Does the government think that it is only the rich and the powerful that can provide useful information?

So can ordinary people like this writer. The government should bug ordinary people too in order to create a level playing field. Not only Neera Radia and Amar Singh are worth snooping on. People like me too have valuable ideas that would help the government. Alas! All my ideas and the pearls of wisdom exchanged with friends go waste because the government does not snoop on me. If the government were to do so would not some of that wisdom penetrate the dense minds of our rulers to improve governance and conditions in our nation?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Politics of convicted MPs! Oct

3

      1 Vote

The current controversy over the Supreme Court (SC) judgment and the government’s Ordinance on the continuance of convicted MPs in legislatures needs to be appreciated in its proper perspective. Right now corruption is a very emotive issue. The public not surprisingly has jumped to the conclusion that the Ordinance which sought to overrule the SC judgment was part of political chicanery. But to what extent does the SC judgment or for that matter the Ordinance actually affect the prevalence of corruption in the system? Is everybody in the government, parliament and judiciary missing the wood for the trees?

The existing Representation of Peoples (RP) Act was challenged by two writ petitions filed by advocate Lily Thomas and Lok Prahari, through its General Secretary S. N. Shukla. The petitioners questioned the legality of MPs continuing in parliament despite conviction by obtaining a stay order and further hearing from a higher court. The SC considered the RP Act unconstitutional and ruled that immediately after conviction the MP with a sentence of two or more years.must be disqualified. The Union cabinet drafted an ordinance to neutralize the Supreme Court’s order mandating immediate disqualification. The government held that if the conviction was stayed by the higher court within 90 days the elected representative should not be disqualified. But the government in its ordinance denied the convicted MP perks and voting rights till being cleared by a higher court. Only, the MP’s seat would remain occupied and there would be no by-election.

Recognizing ground realities the government considered the ease with which motivated and fraudulent prosecution and conviction could be secured from lower courts to harm even innocent politicians. Law Minister Kapil Sibal said that “everybody knows the judicial system has miserably failed to save itself from corruption charges and nepotism”. Even though the Ordinance remedy may be flawed the truth of judicial corruption cannot be denied and has indeed been voiced by Supreme Court judges and reputed jurists.

The media has gone to town attributing Rahul Gandhi’s outburst against the Ordinance as the trigger to clean up the system and check corruption and criminalization. The reality is of course that it was the President’s doubts about the legality of the Ordinance conveyed to cabinet ministers that was seized by the Congress party to enact Rahul Gandhi’s drama in order to obtain credit. The entire issue is being projected by the media and perhaps being swallowed by the public as a great fight against corruption launched by the Congress inspired by Rahul Gandhi. This is laughable. The politicians, the judiciary and the media are living in world of make believe. Consider the reality.

Two MPs, Lalu Yadav and Rashid Masood have been unseated in parliament after being convicted in corruption cases. Their corruption was committed decades ago. Lalu Yadav has been convicted after 17 years and Masood has been convicted after 23 years of their misdemeanors. Even if neither was a sitting MP both would have enjoyed three of four terms of being in parliament before this recent conviction. What kind of fight against corruption and cleansing of parliament is that? Currently there would be a dozen leading MPs involved in corruption during the Commonwealth Games and other mega scams under investigation and facing court proceedings. Will they be unseated after remaining in parliament for the next several terms and being convicted after a few decades?

The prime need is to make mandatory the completion of all court cases within six months so that speedy justice can punish the guilty. That calls for serious judicial reform. Instead of addressing that the obsession with legal nitpicking related to the RP Act through Supreme Court rulings and government Ordinances is meaningless and irrelevant. It is designed only to deceive the public into believing that corruption is genuinely being fought.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

PM’s US trip succeeds despite sabotage! Oct

1

      1 Vote

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to America has been as successful as could be reasonably expected. It was a crucial trip during which the PM met President Obama, Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and heads of other SAARC nations. In his meeting with President Obama a game changing breakthrough was achieved not sufficiently appreciated by analysts. America and India have agreed to become closest partners for defence cooperation. For transfer of defence technology India ’s relations with the US are now at par with Britain.

This is what Pandit Nehru sought from President Kennedy after the Sino-Indian conflict of 1962 when the latter’s death aborted the effort. This is what President Bush sought when he signed the nuclear deal but that effort failed because the Indian government scared of domestic criticism failed to deliver. Now agreement has been reached. The first sign of change is evident from India ’s consent to participate in joint naval exercises in the world’s largest maritime exercise involving dozens of countries. China is not invited to the exercise and the People’s Liberation Army has expressed strong opposition to it. Regardless of the PM’s future the Indo-US deal has been signed. It is likely to endure because it is not between political parties but between governments.

The PM’s meeting with his Pakistani counterpart was as crucial. Though no breakthrough was achieved or attempted the ice was broken. Contrary to the expectations of sceptics the PM addressed India ’s immediate concerns about border violations and terror camps. Mr. Sharif did acknowledge those concerns and promised action to stabilize the border. After he delivers some results the PMs will meet to carry the dialogue further. Already undated invitations for such meeting have been extended. If the PM achieved a big step forward towards the US , he also managed a baby half-step towards Pakistan . Now it remains to be seen how the agreements of this visit actually translate into results.

Anyone following the run-up to the Prime Minister’s visit would marvel at the number of glitches that suddenly erupted to mar its prospects. And for each manufactured event to scuttle progress in the talks the media played its part by a hysterical negative approach to the visit. The opposition parties by their strident criticism of the PM while he was abroad, throwing all accepted diplomatic norms to the winds, also played its part. It is a well established norm that opposition parties do not attack a head of state when he is abroad or when opposition leaders themselves are abroad. This is what democratic bipartisan approach to foreign policy denotes. But the BJP launched a shrill attack against the PM demanding an explanation while he was in the US.

The rot started with Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi. He enacted a preplanned unprecedented theatrical performance to rubbish the PM just hours before he was scheduled to meet President Obama. This demeaned the PM in the eyes of the opposition and demands for his resignation were voiced. It is a reflection of our sick state of politics that even the PM’s former press Advisor Mr. Sanjay Baru was swept along the popular current to advise the PM to resign. It is amazing that not a single voice within or outside the Congress party has made the obvious democratic demand. After the intemperate, ill-timed and irresponsible statement by the ruling party’s vice-president to damage prospects of international negotiations, it is Rahul Gandhi who should be sacked from his post if he does not voluntarily resign.

Why should the PM be asked to quit?

Narendra Modi in a public rally in Delhi lashed out at Gandhi. But he was equally amiss himself. In his speech he sought to damage the PM’s foreign visit by uttering two falsehoods. The first was that the PM had allegedly lamented to Obama that India was a very poor nation in need of help. From where did Modi get his information?

From all accounts the PM discussed terrorism and not India ’s poverty. The second falsehood was even more intriguing. Based upon a TV quote by a noted Pakistani journalist Modi attempted to further muddy the atmosphere just hours before the PM and Nawaz Sharif were to meet. He quoted Pakistani anchor of Geo TV, Hamid Mir, who alleged on TV that Nawaz Sharif had described the PM as a “village woman” pleading before the US President. This was supposed to be said over a breakfast interview given by Sharif to two other journalists and Mir. The two other journalists, Barkha Dutt and a Pakistani journalist Absar Alam, both denied Mir’s version. It seemed that Sharif said that concerns against Pakistan could be addressed directly to Islamabad instead of to Washington.

This was in line with India ’s consistent stand contrary to Pakistan ’s earlier approach that Indo-Pak ties should be bilateral without third party intervention. After Barkha Dutt and Absar Alam rubbished Mir’s claims the latter confessed that Sharif made no criticism of the PM. He lamely tried to explain away his contradicted version by saying that Sharif spoke in jest. But why did not Mir say this in his original comment on TV? In that remark he even indicated that Sharif considered Manmohan Singh weak and was looking forward to doing business with his successor after 2014.

One will not speculate whether all this happened by coincidence or by design, and if by design, the inspiration of these incidents. Hamid Mir is a powerful and influential TV journalist in Pakistan. Currently there are differences between the Pakistan army and the civil government over how to tackle the Taliban. Nawaz Sharif is seeking a dialogue. The army wants to continue with the status quo by “fighting” the Taliban. Mir sympathized with the army by stating:

“It’s a very complicated situation. The army does not seem to be in the mood for talks as it has gained a lot of ground against the Taliban in the recent past.”

Mir should know. He has after all excellent contacts. He was in fact the last journalist to interview slain Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin laden in Afghanistan in 2002. It is difficult to believe that he could have accomplished this without the clearance, if not cooperation, of the ISI.

In summation, Rahul Gandhi, Narendra Modi and Hamid Mir all passed comments that could have damaged the PM’s US visit. Large sections of big business electronic media and the opposition joined them. Modi and Gandhi are repeatedly projected by the media as the two contenders for becoming prime minister. It is ironic that both contenders are on the same side insofar as the PM’s negotiations in the US were concerned. It is also intriguing that these three fed on each other’s narrative to rubbish the PM. But then, this does not necessarily suggest collusion. It could be pure coincidence. As for big business that funds both media and politics it may matter little which contender becomes PM. Heads I win, tails you lose!

For big business Modi and Gandhi might well be two sides of the same coin. But beyond business interests of the corporate sector there are also powerful international forces interested in damaging relations between India and the US , as well as between India and Pakistan . Now which international forces would be pleased if Indo-US and Indo-Pak elations deteriorated? It is for readers to ponder and arrive at their own conclusions.

Image (c) ibnlive.in.com

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

The great Congress mystery! Sep

30

      4 Votes

There is a mystery related to the functioning of the Congress party that nobody I have asked has been able to clear. The latest episode heightens the mystery. The Union cabinet along with the core group of the Congress party in the presence and with the consent of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi approved the draft of the Ordinance to protect criminal MPs. After the Ordinance was presented to the President he expressed doubts about its legality and delayed signing it. Meanwhile the opposition mounted a blistering attack against the Ordinance. Cabinet ministers and Congress party leaders stoutly defended the Ordinance and accused the opposition of being complicit in the decision to draft the Bill protecting criminal MPs.

Then Congress Vice President Mr. Rahul Gandhi without notice intervened in a Congress press conference and condemned the Ordinance in very strong and intemperate language. He did this while the PM was abroad about to hold very crucial meetings with several heads of states. The timing of Mr. Gandhi’s remarks was so significant that had he not been a leader of such limited understanding one might have concluded that he was representing a hostile foreign power seeking to damage India ’s foreign policy.

After Mr. Gandhi spoke the cabinet ministers and Congress party leaders instead of criticizing his performance somersaulted and fell in line making nonsense of their own earlier publicly stated remarks. This writer has never in his long career seen such a craven display of sycophancy and lack of self respect and honour as long as can be remembered.

Here then is the mystery. What is the secret of Mrs. Gandhi’s hold on all members of the Congress party? She cannot get votes. Her party is performing badly even in her own constituency despite campaigning by her and her family members. She has been accused by credible international sources of receiving illegal funds from foreign sources. She has been accused by credible international sources of having a secret illegal foreign bank account. She has never taken the trouble to deny charges. She has not displayed any significant expertise related to economic, foreign or political policy. Her son, Mr. Rahul Gandhi, is even less accomplished than her. There are serious and credible allegations of his having been detained in the US possessing unaccounted money and drugs and subsequently being released through intervention of the Indian government.

Despite all this, Congress party members from top to bottom behave like craven slaves of mother and son. One cannot fathom the reason for this. One would like to be enlightened. In conclusion this writer would like to clarify that he is not critical mainly of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi or Mr. Rahul Gandhi. They look after their interests as all people are expected to. It is the members of the Congress party that attract the strongest possible criticism. So obnoxious and counter productive is their conduct that it strengthens this writer’s belief that the Congress party must be buried in order to preserve Indian democracy.

Share this:

5 Comments

Posted in Nation

Kashmir exposures Convert crisis into opportunity! Sep

27

      1 Vote

Government should not overspend effort to undo the political damage inflicted by the recent leaked allegations by the Ministry of Defence and General VK Singh. The damage to India’s case in Kashmir cannot be undone. Just days after the recent disclosure terrorists have struck in Jammu to kill army and police personnel. More attacks should be expected by terrorists emboldened by the disclosures vindicating their allegations. Politics is about perception of facts and not about facts themselves. The recent disclosures have confirmed in the public mind all the perceived truths about India’s relationship with Kashmir repeatedly articulated by separatists and many other foreign powers. The government should instead seize the moment to convert a setback into opportunity and settle once and for all the Kashmir dispute that has bedeviled the subcontinent’s peace since Independence.

However, in order to attempt that the government must be honest enough to confront the truth and bold enough to dare an initiative.

What is the truth?

One need no iterate the oft repeated facts relating to the Kashmir dispute. Kashmir is not the problem but the symptom of the problem. The problem is the Partition. Kashmir was a state with contiguous borders with both India and Pakistan. The Hindu ruler of this Muslim majority state wanted independence and good relations with both nations. The attack by Pakistani raiders backed by its army to forcibly seize Kashmir forced the ruler’s hands. He acceded to India in order to obtain the Indian army’s help to repulse the enemy.

As Kashmir Chief Minister Mr. Omar Abdullah pointed out recently, Kashmir unlike other princely states of the Indian Union did not merge with India but stopped short after accession. That is why it has a special status and Article 370. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru at the time of accepting Kashmir’s instrument of accession stated that it was “subject to the will of the people of Kashmir”. This was followed by India’s acceptance of the UN Resolution regarding Plebiscite in Kashmir. For over six decades stupid policies pursued by the governments of India and Pakistan, both acting like foreign pawns, has denied the region peace and stability. The distorted approach of both governments that have behaved like Raja Jaichand and Mir Jafar to ally with foreigners against their own flesh and blood has its roots in the Partition.

Britain offered the opportunity to keep India united by presenting the Cabinet Mission Plan that would have created a federation. Jinnah accepted the proposal. Nehru rejected it because the Plan allowed the Muslim dominated units to secede after 10 years if they so wished. Like pathetic colonial minions the leaders of India and Pakistan accepted Independence and Partition without the borders of the new nations determined. Immediately after Independence, accompanied by Partition, riots engineered by interested foreign powers to perpetuate the division cost a million lives within a few months. Similarly the engineered Kashmir dispute led to the partition of the state in order to create a permanent bone of contention that would prevent reunification.

Nehru, who had rejected the Cabinet Mission Plan and a confederation when these were offered, attempted before his death to undo the spirit of the Partition by creating an Indo-Pakistan confederation. In 1959 President Ayub Khan offered joint defence that would have automatically led to a confederation. But the same President Ayub Khan rejected Nehru’s proposal of a confederation presented by Sheikh Abdullah which Jinnah had accepted at the time of the Cabinet Mission Plan. In other words, both India and Pakistan had wanted confederation. But they had wanted it at different times. Therefore they cannot agree. Is this not shocking diplomacy? The absence of statesmanship displayed by leaders of both governments and their readiness to serve foreign interests could not be more glaring.

The latest revelations by the Indian government and General VK Singh have made prospects of reconciliation ever more remote. Peace will come only if the leaders of India and Pakistan are bold enough to cut the Gordian knot and make a dramatic breakthrough. Critics have opposed the proposed meeting between the Prime Ministers of India and Pakistan scheduled for September 29 in New York. BJP leader and former foreign minister Mr. Yashwant Sinha has stated that such a meeting is premature as long as terrorism continues. He suggested that lower officials should first meet. One begs to differ. Even if lower officials meet and people to people contacts continue for a hundred years there will be no progress.

The problem is the trust deficit. That exists between governments and not between peoples. That exists because the armies of both nations are in contention. Only joint defence and operations to wipe out terrorism from the region will remove the trust deficit. There are more victims of terrorism in Pakistan than in India. Prime Minister Mr. Manmohan Singh should bluntly tell Mr. Nawaz Sharif on September 29 that enough is enough. Unless the armies of both nations cooperate there cannot be peace and stability in the region. If even now, when both nations are besieged by terrorism and instability, their governments cannot act rationally, they never will. Without joint defence the trust deficit cannot be removed. If there is joint defence it must inevitably lead to some form of confederation. Both leaders should read the writing on the wall. They should forget what their critics might say today. They should focus on what historians will say tomorrow.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Politicians, Army, playing with fire! Sep

25

      1 Vote

General VK Singh reportedly has decided to file an application with the Right to Information (RTI) commission seeking a copy of General Vinod Bhatia’s secret report on the alleged misuse of the top secret Technical Support Division (TSD) during his tenure as Army Chief. Will the government respond by releasing the secret report? After news of the report appeared in the media the government stated that the report “impinges on matters of national security and, as such, the government will take a decision and further actions after careful examination.” If the contents of the report impinge on national security it is difficult to see how the government can agree to release the report.

However, then a further question is raised. If the report will not be released to the public how was it allowed to be leaked to the media? After the media exposure the government did not deny the report or displayed reticence but went out of its way to acknowledge its contents and resolved to probe the affair. One spokesperson of the Congress party blithely informed TV that since the media had obtained the report the matter had to be fully probed. But the government has not addressed the obvious question of how the media obtained the report. From all accounts it has not ordered an inquiry into who leaked the report and taken steps to punish the guilty. The circumstantial evidence of the government itself leaking the report is compelling. In the pursuit of petty partisan politics was the government oblivious of the grave implications that might flow from the leakage?

That is not all. Politicians further endangered the situation. BJP President Mr. Rajnath Singh defended General VK Singh and charged the UPA government with targeting him because he shared a platform with Mr. Narendra Modi. The Punjab Congress was quick to retaliate. Captain Amarinder Singh reiterated the allegation in the report that General VK Singh had misused TSD to attempt scuttling the appointment of the current Army Chief General Bikram Singh. He challenged Punjab Chief Minister Mr. Prakash Singh Badal to clarify his stand since he was supporting the BJP and Mr. Narendra Modi.

Have India ’s politicians gone stark raving mad? In the pursuit of their stupid and petty rivalries they are creating a situation that could encourage polarization between Hindu and Sikh, between Haryana and Punjab . Whatever the truth of real or imagined differences between army generals, these might be based upon entirely professional grounds. But in public perception the differences could most likely be seen as between communities and states. If such perception is allowed to grow, how will it affect all the ranks in the army?

The TSD unit was conceived and created after the 26/11 terrorist attack in Mumbai. The purpose of this top secret unit was to counter terrorism. Now not only the existence of this top secret unit is blown, but efforts are actually being made to reveal its operations and functioning in order to settle political scores. The most far reaching consequences of this sorry episode might well be General VK Singh rebuttal of the allegations against him publicized by the government. In an interview to Times Now TV channel he furnished damaging details of how the army has been operating in Jammu and Kashmir for the past many decades. His revelations make mockery of India ’s official stand on Kashmir.

One can imagine how gleefully members of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) in China and the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) in Pakistan would be with rapt attention watching the unfolding exposure of the functioning of India’s top secret army unit established to counter terrorism.

Share this:

1 Comment

Posted in Nation

Has Government committed treason? Sep

22

      2 Votes

Not surprisingly the controversy created by the media exposure and its subsequent official confirmation of the alleged misuse of the Technical Services Division (TSD) by former Army Chief General VK Singh is expected to snowball into a major national crisis. But the crisis may not evolve as those who leaked the information might imagine. According to The Indian Express that published the report General Singh had conveyed a warning that if they went ahead and published it “they will get it in the neck”. General Singh reportedly told the Press Trust of India (PTI) news agency that anyone recommending a probe into the functioning of TSD was being nonsensical because its operations were meant to be secret.

General Singh might have enlightened the public a little more. The mere fact that the inquiry into the functioning of TSD was “secret” suggests that the TSD operation was not only secret but probably “top secret”. If that is the case the consequences for the government as well as for media outlets utilized by the government could be very serious. In that event even the existence of TSD should never have been publicized. Further, if there is exposure of the actual working of the top secret unit, leaking information about it may well be considered treasonable under law, regardless of whether infromation is true or false. It involves national security. Such information can help the nation’s enemies. Even knowledge of the existence of TSD can help the nation’s enemies.

Did the government factor this aspect into its calculations before rushing to the media with its leaks? The last on this issue has not been heard. Events thus far may be in fact just the start of a crisis that could traumatize the system.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

President, army and governance! Sep

21

      1 Vote

According to media reports the Defence Ministry constituted a secret Board of Officers body headed by Lt General Vinod Bhatia to probe alleged irregularities committed during the tenure of former Army Chief General VK Singh. It is alleged that General Singh set up a controversial Military Intelligence unit, Technical Services Division (TSD) that misused secret funds to conduct unauthorized covert operations that interfered in domestic politics. According to reports General Bhatia has advised a fuller probe by an external agency like the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The report alleges that TDS misused secret funds in an effort to destabilize the Jammu and Kashmir government, as well as block the promotion of the present Army Chief General Bikram Singh. The media report has furnished details about how these irregularities were sought to be accomplished.

This report was played up as a first page banner in The Indian Express, and appeared as an unobtrusive single column in the inside pages of The Times of India. The Express claims that it tried unsuccessfully to contact General VK Singh but managed to interact through a mutual contact that quoted the General to say that the report was rubbish and the government was motivated by the fact that he had shared a public platform with opposition leader Mr. Narendra Modi. General Bhatia had submitted his report to the Defence Ministry in March this year. This is an amazing episode and offers glaring evidence of how deeply governance and responsibility to preserve national security have sunk. The following questions need to be addressed.

First, now that the report has been quoted in the media it has to be established whether the allegations leveled by General Bhatia’s team of officers are valid. If true it reveals a shocking state of affairs in which a serving Army Chief can so misuse his powers to further political ends unconnected to his call of duty. If untrue, it reveals an equally shocking state of affairs in which politics has infected the armed forces to allow such false and motivated allegations to be made in order to settle differences within the Defence Ministry. Secondly, the report was submitted in March. Why has it surfaced only now almost six months later after the Defence Minister reportedly has got into the act? Does this validate General Singh’s reported comment that he is being targeted only because he shared a public platform with Mr. Narendra Modi? Thirdly, if it be assumed that the report has substance surely there are various discreet methods of addressing the issue, of even indirectly punishing the guilty, and keep the controversy away from public attention?

Transparency in governance is an excellent principle and the media cannot be criticized for playing up the report when offered the chance. But does it behoove a government to throw all considerations of national security to the winds and jeopardize it by publicizing such an episode if indeed it occurred as alleged? What kind of government is ruling India , and what kind of priorities does it have?

Finally, one cannot but reflect once again whether there can ever be accountability in our collapsing democracy unless the President discharges the responsibilities assigned to his post by our Constitution. It is weeks since communal riots exposed the failure of law and order in Uttar Pradesh. Every single party spokesperson has demanded that the government be dismissed. Official spokespersons of the Congress have said that law and order has collapsed. Yet the central government remains a mute spectator although it claims that the rule of law has collapsed in the state. Neither the Prime Minister nor the President has taken a single tiny step to introduce Governor’s rule. The latest episode related to the TSD report has grave implications for the state of affairs in our armed forces as well as for national security. The President as the Supreme Commander of the armed forces is directly responsible to safeguard both. Will he still remain mute?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Modi’s poll campaign error! Sep

19

      Rate This

From all accounts Mr. Narendra Modi’s inaugural campaign rally in Rewari after being anointed Prime Ministerial candidate of the BJP was the largest ever seen in the district. In some of his earlier rallies also common people had flocked to his meetings with great enthusiasm. Obviously, in addition to the formidable publicity and mobilization organized by the RSS and powerful business interests supporting Mr. Modi, certain qualities of his persona too have caught the imagination of the masses. This has been seized by political analysts and his party’s leaders to describe Mr. Modi as the first great national Other Backward Classes (OBC) leader who might become Prime Minister. Media analysts may be forgiven for their ignorance of political ground realities to describe Mr. Modi as a national OBC leader. But surely the poll managers of the BJP ought to have known better?

It is a grievous flaw to describe Mr. Modi as a national OBC icon. Not only are BJP leaders assiduously promoting this image, even Mr. Modi himself seems to have become victim of this flawed propaganda. Mr. Modi belongs to the Ghanchi caste found only in the state of Gujarat . It is a sub-caste in the OBC category. People belonging to the Teli caste in other states may empathize with the Ghanchi caste because of a shared occupational history related to extraction of oil. Otherwise the Ghanchi caste will have little relevance outside Gujarat . Belonging to the Ghanchi caste makes Mr. Modi an OBC leader. It does not make him a national icon of OBC voters. There is no national OBC icon. There cannot be a national OBC icon. There can only be a national icon who is an OBC. The distinction should be appreciated.

The very logic of caste identity runs counter to a nationwide OBC identity. Caste mobilization becomes easy precisely because the approach is tribal. Caste leaders often unite to make common cause. That makes it easy and convenient for the big business corporate sector to use money power to split or align political forces to suit their interest. But when have castes en block voted for a leader belonging to another caste because of his OBC status? Why do not the Kurmis in Bihar vote for Mr. Laloo Yadav, or the Yadavs vote for Mr. Nitish Kumar? Before Mr. Modi became his party’s election campaign chief the BJP had already laid the ground for positive poll results in UP after Mr. Rajnath Singh brought back Mr. Kalyan Singh into his party’s fold. The revived Thakur-Kurmi alliance had earlier brought the BJP its largest ever parliamentry tally of 57 MPs. With Miss Uma Bharati entering UP politics, in addition to her oratory expected to consolidate the Hindutva vote bank, she will also undoubtedly attract Lodh voters belonging to her caste.

Yet media analysts and BJP poll managers are busy trying to exploit Mr. Modi’s OBC status to project him as the first great OBC national leader who might become Prime Minister. Unfortunately, Mr. Modi has bought this flawed approach. Celebrating his birthday recently in Gujarat Mr. Modi reached out and invited many OBC leaders of the organized and unorganized sectors to his function. National thinking has become so corrupted and distorted by the caste reservation policy and mobilization of quick vote banks that an obvious truth escaped media analysts as well as the poll campaign managers of the BJP. If enthusiastic masses have flocked to Mr. Modi’s rallies it is not because he is a national OBC icon. It is because people have recognized that Mr. Modi has risen from very humble origins like themselves to acquire a national political status. If the masses empathize with Mr. Modi it is not because he is an OBC but because he was poor and is now powerful.

The flawed approach adopted by Mr. Modi and the BJP regarding the importance of his OBC status can have very far reaching consequences. It will determine what kind of Indian will emerge tomorrow if Mr. Modi does become Prime Minister. On his birthday Mr. Modi invited OBC leaders belonging to the organized and unorganized sectors of labour. OBC leaders can mobilize votes. That is an understandably attractive attribute. But so can union leaders of organized and unorganized labour mobilize voters. Why could not Mr. Modi have focused on them instead? Does Mr. Modi seek an India of his dreams symbolized by his proposed Statue of Unity to consolidate on the prevalent national divisive culture based upon over 4000 contending castes battling for economic crumbs?

Or does he seek to create a new Indian with a national identity above caste and community ready to confront the 21st century world? Will he support caste-based reservation or economic criteria for job and educational reservation? Will he promote universal compulsory primary education to lift all castes from poverty? These are some questions that Mr. Modi and the leaders of the BJP need to ponder if they seek a genuine political change. They have to decide whether they want victory in the present or a victory for the future. Do they want to cater to India of the present or to India of the future that will belong to the young?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Modi’s proposed Statue of Unity! Sep

17

      1 Vote

Concluding his first public rally in Rewari after being anointed Prime Ministerial candidate of the BJP, Mr. Narendra Modi appealed to his audience to donate pieces of iron from each village in the state to be used for constructing his proposed Statue of Unity on the sea coast of Gujarat . Mr. Modi wants similar donations of iron pieces from each village in each state across the nation in honour of Sardar Vallabhai Patel who will symbolize unity in the proposed statue. Mr. Modi has declared his intention of constructing the tallest statue in the world, taller than America ’s Statue of Liberty, in honour of Sardar Patel.

This writer has serious objection to the proposal. Sardar Patel was undoubtedly a very great man, as were Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru. Patel performed great service to the nation by unifying the princely states of India after Independence . But though these great leaders did great things for the nation they also committed unforgivable errors the consequence of which continue to haunt our nation. These leaders, mainly Sardar Patel, united Bharat but they divided India . They divided India without the slightest justification. They divided India because they allowed themselves to be influenced and manipulated by the British.

With just over 1000 people killed in Punjab through communal riots engineered by the British administration immediately after Lord Mountbatten became India ’s Viceroy, and about 12000 killed in Bihar and Bengal over a period of two years, these leaders violated their solemn pledge to the people of India by accepting Partition. Gandhi on the fateful day, June 3, 1947 when the Congress formally accepted Partition, conveniently observed his ‘day of silence’. Nehru and Patel were the hawks in the Congress Working Committee in favour of accepting Partition. JB Kripalani, Jayaprakash Narain and Ram Manohar Lohia who opposed Partition were overruled by the rest. On June 2, on eve of the decision, Gandhi assured Mountbatten who visited him that he would not create any hurdles against the decision.

In what manner then might Sardar Patel symbolize unity? After two lawyers from Gujarat, Gandhi and Jinnah, and two aristocrats from Uttar Pradesh, Nehru and Liaquat Ali, butchered and cut asunder Punjab and Bengal displaying their ignorance about the ground realities in these states, people today should display some sensitivity towards the sentiments of provinces where over a million people were slaughtered and over ten million rendered homeless due to the follies of these leaders. In case critics challenge this view about the unforgivable decision about the Partition, let them note that both Gandhi and Nehru acknowledged their error. Gandhi wanted to settle down in Pakistan to undo the Partition just before he was assassinated thanks to ignored security measures during Sardar Patel’s tenure as Home Minister. Nehru sent Sheikh Abdullah to Pakistan to plead with President Ayub Khan to reunite India and Pakistan through a proposed confederation during which effort he died.

Therefore this writer would like to remind Mr. Narendra Modi and many others from different parts of India that they may have their history and may choose to honour whom they wish. The peoples of Punjab and Bengal have their own history and their own memories to recall. Congress leaders today may be the best in the land. They are welcome to govern India . But the Congress Party as Imperial Britain’s instrument to partition India deserves to be buried. Let Congress leaders reinvent themselves into a new organization. After all, this demand merely echoes the last wish of the most revered Congress icon, Mahatma Gandhi, on the day before he died.

Mr. Modi is welcome to construct his Statue of Unity. The people of Punjab and Bengal might seek their own way of responding to history. Human folly can delay but not derail history. Ultimately, cultural nationalism will triumph.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Profit & Loss of UP riots! Sep

14

      Rate This

All political parties and media outlets seem agreed that the recent Muzzafarnagar riots which cost 40 lives and brought untold misery to thousands who fled their homes, were the result of a conspiracy. But all seem to disagree about who was behind the conspiracy. The UP government was suspiciously lax in acting on warnings issued by the central government months earlier. Inexplicably it allowed a Jat mahapanchayat of 1.5 lakh people just 20 km from Muzaffarnagar in violation of prohibitory orders in force in the entire district due to prevailing tension. Thousands of vehicles and tractors from Haryana, Delhi and the neighbouring districts of UP were allowed to descend on the venue of the mahapanchayat. One UP minister has acknowledged that there was an administrative lapse. Samajwadi Party (SP) leader Mr. Mulayam Singh was at pains to stress that the riots were not communal but ethnic – between Jats and Muslims. Chief Minister Mr. Akhilesh Yadav has accused other political parties for the conspiracy.

The UP administration has charged that a five minute fake video was used to fan violence. One BJP leader has been arrested in connection with that video. The district administration of Muzafarnagar lodged criminal cases against a senior BJP leader and former minister along with three other BJP leaders for violating the prohibitory order and allegedly delivered provocative speeches during the Jat mahapanchayat. The BJP leaders have denied charges. Leaders of the Bharat Kisan Union (BKU) and the Congress were also charged on similar grounds. Allegations and counter allegations of conspiracy to instigate the riots flew thick and fast between the BJP, SP, Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) and Congress. However, it is futile to speculate who was behind the conspiracy. It is futile to speculate that if there was indeed a conspiracy, whether it was the work of individual politicians or was it sanctioned by their respective political organizations. What can be assessed with some accuracy is the political impact of riots. Which party gained, and which party lost?

The SP is a huge loser. It is likely to lose its Muslim vote which is vital for its electoral success. Had Muzzafarnagar limited itself to communal tension the SP would have gained. That explains the seemingly deliberate administrative dereliction of duty. The Muslims of West UP who supported Mr. Ajit Singh’s Rashtriya Lok DaL (RLD) might have been weaned away to support SP. But things got out of hand. The Jat mahapanchayat was followed by horrendous riots. The government’s failure has left the Muslim community bitter and alienated.

The BSP could be a gainer. The first Muslim priority as of present is to remove this government. In the assembly elections the BSP offers the best chance of doing it. Similarly the Congress could be a gainer. For parliamentary elections the Muslim vote will attempt to block the BJP. On present reckoning the Congress provides the only hope of accomplishing that.

The BJP is the biggest gainer. Notwithstanding Mr. Mulayam Singh’s nitpicking distinction between communal riots and ethnic riots, the accession of the Jat vote to the BJP, along with widespread communal polarization following the riots across the state, could provide a huge boost to BJP prospects.

The RLD is the biggest loser. The traditional harmony between Muslims and Jats carefully nurtured by the late Choudhary Charan Singh rendered West UP a solid base for the RLD. That harmony has been shattered. The cost of this division will be very heavy. It could destroy the dream of carving a new state of Harit Pradesh in West UP. Both the Jats and the Muslims yearned for it. The Muslims are one third of the population in the region. The Deoband centre of religious learning is in the region. The destruction of the fine balance between Jats and Muslims may be irreparable for a long time. Both communities may now repent at leisure.

It is in this cynical way that politicians will calculate the outcome of the Muzzafarnagar riots. They will not spare a thought for the heartrending tragedy befallen to innocent women and children. Their crime was that they belonged to a community. Their weakness was that they were poor. Their tragedy was that they lived in a country where politics is conducted by a cynical, cruel and corrupt class of leaders.

Share this:

1 Comment

Posted in Nation

Modified Modi! Sep

12

      2 Votes

According to media reports the BJP will formally anoint Mr. Narendra Modi as its Prime Ministerial candidate when the party’s parliamentary board meeting is held on Friday. Some time earlier the view had been expressed in these columns that there was no substantive difference between Prime Minister Mr. Manmohan Singh and Mr. Narendra Modi insofar as approach to economic policy was concerned. Both leaders seem to be focused mainly on quick growth based upon foreign investment and delivery of maximum facilities to the big corporate sector.

However, this writer deemed Mr. Modi superior because he was described as a “muscular” version of the Prime Minister. In Gujarat he offered quicker and smoother delivery to big business than the Prime Minister could at the centre. The reason was simple. There was no extra constitutional authority to derail and slow down Mr. Modi in Gujarat as the office of the National Advisory Council did to the Prime Minister in Delhi . The Prime Minister was helpless. He was appointed by Mrs. Sonia Gandhi and had to function under her direction. It was thought that Mr. Modi would have no such fetters to implement the economic model in which the Prime Minister reposed his faith. That view it seems was too hasty. Mr. Modi may in fact be no more muscular than the Prime Minister.

Recent events should leave no doubt that if Mr. Modi is declared as the BJP’s Prime Ministerial candidate it will be only due to the pressure exerted by the RSS on the party. The RSS has appointed Mr. Modi as the party’s Prime Ministerial candidate and left it to the party to announce the decision. Mr. Modi cannot be unaware of the crucial RSS support needed for his elevation. The support reportedly was promised after extended parleys and eventually the decision was taken after agreement was reached on the minimum demands conveyed by the RSS. According to media reports the four conditions set by the RSS for Mr. Modi to receive support were to pledge building a grand Ram Temple in Ayodhya, to enforce the contentious Uniform Civil Code across the country, to repeal of Article 370 in J&K and end the special status of the state, and to press for full protection of cows. All four conditions reflect policies of traditional Hindutva.

However, the merits or otherwise of the policies insisted upon by the RSS are not important. What is significant is that the RSS is insistent upon the implementation of its agenda. Like Mrs. Sonia Gandhi choosing Mr. Manmohan Singh as Prime Minister, the RSS has chosen Mr. Modi as its candidate. But unlike Mrs. Gandhi who established her National Advisory Council to offer policy directives to the government after Mr. Manmohan Singh assumed office, Mr. Mohan Bhagwat has not wasted time. He has already laid down the minimum policy agenda. This is just the start.

Many more policy directives should be expected if Mr. Modi does indeed become Prime Minister. Although Mr. Modi therefore may not prove to be a more muscular version of Mr. Manmohan Singh, constrained as he will be by an extra constitutional body, Mr. Mohan Bhagwat certainly is showing signs of being a much more muscular version of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi. This aspect needs to be considered carefully by all the supporters of Mr. Modi. It should be amply clear that apart from support by members of the public Mr. Modi is heavily backed by the most powerful big business corporate sector. Apart from Mr. Modi’s own undoubted attributes, his popularity depends heavily on the massive support rendered to him by the big business electronic media. There is nothing surprising about that. Big business will protect its own interests. But a serious question arises.

Many supporters of Mr. Modi draw comfort from the fact that he has not personally referred to any of the pro-Hindu policies associated with the hardcore Hindutva elements of the RSS. These supporters are being delusional. They betray their ignorance about how politics is played out. The approval of every action and every statement by any of the sources in the BJP will devolve on Mr. Modi as the election campaign in charge. His silence is meaningless. Silence will be taken as assent. If Mr. Modi disapproves of any policy or statement by members of his party he will have to contradict them publicly to record his dissent. Voters are influenced by whole parties and not by their perception of any one individual, however powerful or charismatic.

What should be clear therefore to all supporters of Mr. Modi, especially the powerful big business elements, is that the RSS agenda must be factored in their calculations. This is because Mr. Modi and RSS will be inseparable if he becomes the Prime Minister. There will be nothing wrong with that if Mr. Modi and the RSS see eye to eye on all policy matters. If on the other hand Mr. Modi’s personal predilection is at variance from the RSS, there could be a very serious problem. In that event Mr. Modi’s government could become as paralyzed as Mr. Manmohan Singh’s government. There would be precisely the same kind of diarchy in governance as paralyzed the UPA government. The paralysis in the UPA government became so palpable that even Congress General Secretary Mr. Digvijay Singh was constrained to acknowledge publicly that the existing system of diarchy was undesirable.

The powerful vested interests favouring Mr. Modi should therefore carefully scrutinize the total RSS agenda in order to continue their support. This applies to all the international big business executives who descended from Europe and South America to endorse Mr. Modi, to all the young Indians who seek a modern twenty-first century nation and look up to Mr. Modi, to all the biggest business houses in the nation who are solidly backing Mr. Modi, and to all the mainstream media TV anchors who swoon with excitement each time Mr. Modi sneezes. It is entirely possible of course that the RSS policies may exceed their wildest dreams of promoting economic growth and progress in India . But that is a prospect it would be more prudent for them to assess now instead of later. What needs to be understood is that either Mr. Modi is totally supportive of RSS policies, or if he is not, there are prospects once again of paralyzing diarchy that could ruin governance in India.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Post navigation← Older posts

Media’s response to Pak Envoy! Oct

9

      1 Vote

During a press interview to a foreign journalist President Pranab Mukherjee said that even if cross border terrorism was perpetrated by non-state actors as Islamabad claimed, the Pakistan government could not evade responsibility. The territory was under the jurisdiction of the government, the President pointed out. “Non-state actors do not descend from heaven,

” he said. This view was echoed by Information and Broadcasting (I&B) Minister Mr. Manish Tewari who told media that the crossing over by terrorists and non-state actors suggested either complicity or negligence by the Pakistan government. “Obviously these terrorists or non-state actors are not coming out of a vacuum,”

he said.

The Pakistan High Commissioner to India Mr. Salman Bashir gave a veiled rejoinder to these remarks. But he focused his criticism mainly against the media. He accused the media of focusing exclusively on “so-called” incursions and infiltrations from across the border.

He said:

“Whoever is making the argument that they have not descended from heaven, I want to ask who are these thousands of people who are involved in heinous acts of terrorism in Pakistan . Have they descended from heaven? We agree they have not descended from heaven, from where are they being funded and sourced?”

One can appreciate the constraints under which Pakistan ’s official envoy to India has to function. Mr. Bashir said something, and he implied something. Both his assertion and implication deserve attention. Since he thought it fit to direct his ire against the Indian media this writer takes the liberty of directly responding to his criticism.

Mr. Bashir cannot blame the Indian media of responding to continued incursions from across the border which for diplomatic compulsions he described as “so-called”. But he was right to point out the failure of the Indian government as well as the media to adequately differentiate between the government and non-state actors in Pakistan . Mr. Bashir has rightly asserted that “thousands of terrorists” are operating against Pakistan who obviously did not descend from heaven. By implication this is tacit admission of failure of the Pakistan government. It is a fact that there are substantially more victims of terrorism in Pakistan than in India including in the state of J&K. Then Mr. Bashir went on to question the source of funding and training of these terrorists. His central plea was for the enhancement of cooperation between Islamabad and New Delhi.

He said:

“We have evidence which we have shared and are prepared to share with the rest of the world and particularly with the government of India on fuelling of acts of terrorism in Pakistan .”

Mr. Bashir’s plea for greater cooperation between India and Pakistan to fight terror clearly indicates that by questioning the source of terror funding he was not pointing a finger at India . He was obviously indicating the hand of Al Qaeda which inspires global terrorism. In the light of the reality of terrorist activity in Pakistan funded and directed by global forces the Indian government is clearly remiss in not taking an initiative for closer cooperation with Pakistan to combat terror. New Delhi ’s inhibition may be explained by its continued doubts about how deeply subverted Pakistan ’s security establishment is by pro-terror elements. Well, the Indian media has no such inhibitions. Since Mr. Bashir squarely blamed the Indian media I take the liberty of directly addressing him. I put a question to the Pakistan government through him that the Indian government has failed to do.

Mr. Bashir you seek closer cooperation between India and Pakistan , you admit that there are thousands of terrorists operating inside Pakistan . You indicate that they are funded and directed from abroad. You tacitly imply though you do not state that they cannot operate without help from a section of the official machinery. I agree with your overall analysis. My question is: Will the Pakistan government accept an offer of joint intelligence and joint operations against terror to wipe out these non-state actors from both our countries?

I know that you may not deign to respond to such a question from a mere media person instead of from the government. But let me assure you. If you do answer the media will compel the Indian government to respond appropriately.

So will you respond?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

The President’s curious priorities! Oct

8

      1 Vote

After the media pointed out that the credit for the rollback of the Ordinance on convicted MPs went to President Pranab Mukherjee and not to Congress Vice-President Rahul Gandhi who exploited the President’s known reluctance to sign it, Mr. LK Advani praised the President for his decision. However, the President reacted to this praise most curiously. The President with uncalled for modesty went out of his way to dissociate himself from the decision to roll back the Ordinance. It is known that he sat over the Ordinance and was reluctant to sign it. By signing it he could have possibly attracted strictures from the Supreme Court to make his position untenable. Understandably he mulled over the matter and shared his views with UPA Ministers who called on him to discuss the Ordinance. It was after that when Mr. Rahul Gandhi jumped into the controversy to corner credit. Mr. Advani’s praise for the President therefore was a routine and unexceptionable observation.

However the President reacted to the media in response to such praise by saying:

“I cannot comment on what the Opposition has said about my role. My duties are now completely determined by the Indian Constitution.”

The praise for the President was precisely because he did follow the Constitution by not immediately signing the Ordinance. Why, then, his curiously defensive rejoinder? Eyebrows were further raised after the President’s son, Mr. Abhijeet Mukherjee, called on the chief victim of the scrapped Ordinance, Mr. Lalu Prasad Yadav, who was in jail. The popular conclusion derived from this visit was that Mr. Mukherjee had gone there to convince Mr. Yadav that the decision not to sign the Ordinance reflected no personal motive of the President but was dictated by the Constitution. This was unnecessary. Mr. Yadav one is sure is sufficiently knowledgeable to have been aware of that. If such speculation has any basis it is certainly odd that the President should be so concerned about Mr. Yadav’s feelings. The President after all is above party politics.

Alas, it does not seem that the President is as much above party politics as he should be. His continued silence over the horrendous events in Andhra is equally mystifying. After the Union government hastily declared the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh by ceding the new state of Telangana despite the state assembly being overwhelmingly opposed to the measure, the entire state is in flames. Apart from mammoth public protest and indefinite fasts launched by politicians, the whole state is without electric power because of a strike by workers. And this situation has been growing and worsening for days. Has not the Constitutional machinery in the state collapsed to necessitate the application of Article 356 to impose President’s rule in Andhra to restore order? But the Prime Minister and the Union cabinet are mute.

Surprisingly, even the President is silent. Article 78 (b) of the Constitution states: “It shall be the duty of the Prime Minister to furnish such information relating to the administration of the affairs of the Union and proposals for legislation as the President may call for.” Should not the President invoke this Article and initiate action? Surely the millions of agitated people in Andhra Pradesh deserve as much attention as Mr. Lalu Yadav should get?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Snooping, security and privacy! Oct

5

      1 Vote

After Julian Assange and the Wikileaks controversy it is the Edgar Snowden affair that has rocked the world. Snowden was a government contractor working at the National Security Agency (NSA) in America. The NSA in order to protect the US snoops on citizens in America and abroad looking for terrorist connections. The NSA collects and analyses foreign communication and foreign signals of intelligence in order to protect the US. In an interview in Hong Kong Snowden leaked top-secret government surveillance programs that led to an international debate over national security versus individual privacy. In a recent statement to the European Parliament Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Snowden said:

“A culture of secrecy has denied our societies the opportunity to determine the appropriate balance between the human right of privacy and the governmental interest in investigation.”

Among Snowden’s leaks was information about secret US surveillance of foreign governments including Brazil and India. The Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff in protest lashed out at the US in the UN General Assembly and canceled her official visit to Washington. Critics in India not only criticized the US but berated the Indian government after disclosures that it had also like America and China snooped on citizens.

Whatever the extent of public outrage over official snooping, it will not and cannot stop. The world needs a reality check. As long as terrorism survives in the world and weapons of mass destruction can be manufactured by private citizens in a garage, surveillance is a survival imperative for governments. What is required is that such surveillance by all governments be monitored and controlled by the UN.

Technology has not only enabled private citizens to manufacture weapons of mass destruction, but also to snoop on governments and citizens alike. In the foreseeable future therefore privacy cannot be guaranteed for any citizen or government. In the event is it not prudent for people to adjust to the new reality? In other words technology will render total transparency for governments and private citizens unavoidable. It will signify a game changing new culture for mankind. Should not people therefore start adjusting to this change and make their lives totally transparent? It may lead to a happier and safer world.

Indeed, there could well be advantages in being snooped upon! While many people criticize the government’s snooping policy, so do I but for different reasons. My complaint is that the government does not bug my telephone, hack my computer or bug my regular haunts where I have coffee sessions with friends. I want to be heard but nobody listens. Does the government think that it is only the rich and the powerful that can provide useful information?

So can ordinary people like this writer. The government should bug ordinary people too in order to create a level playing field. Not only Neera Radia and Amar Singh are worth snooping on. People like me too have valuable ideas that would help the government. Alas! All my ideas and the pearls of wisdom exchanged with friends go waste because the government does not snoop on me. If the government were to do so would not some of that wisdom penetrate the dense minds of our rulers to improve governance and conditions in our nation?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Politics of convicted MPs! Oct

3

      1 Vote

The current controversy over the Supreme Court (SC) judgment and the government’s Ordinance on the continuance of convicted MPs in legislatures needs to be appreciated in its proper perspective. Right now corruption is a very emotive issue. The public not surprisingly has jumped to the conclusion that the Ordinance which sought to overrule the SC judgment was part of political chicanery. But to what extent does the SC judgment or for that matter the Ordinance actually affect the prevalence of corruption in the system? Is everybody in the government, parliament and judiciary missing the wood for the trees?

The existing Representation of Peoples (RP) Act was challenged by two writ petitions filed by advocate Lily Thomas and Lok Prahari, through its General Secretary S. N. Shukla. The petitioners questioned the legality of MPs continuing in parliament despite conviction by obtaining a stay order and further hearing from a higher court. The SC considered the RP Act unconstitutional and ruled that immediately after conviction the MP with a sentence of two or more years.must be disqualified. The Union cabinet drafted an ordinance to neutralize the Supreme Court’s order mandating immediate disqualification. The government held that if the conviction was stayed by the higher court within 90 days the elected representative should not be disqualified. But the government in its ordinance denied the convicted MP perks and voting rights till being cleared by a higher court. Only, the MP’s seat would remain occupied and there would be no by-election.

Recognizing ground realities the government considered the ease with which motivated and fraudulent prosecution and conviction could be secured from lower courts to harm even innocent politicians. Law Minister Kapil Sibal said that “everybody knows the judicial system has miserably failed to save itself from corruption charges and nepotism”. Even though the Ordinance remedy may be flawed the truth of judicial corruption cannot be denied and has indeed been voiced by Supreme Court judges and reputed jurists.

The media has gone to town attributing Rahul Gandhi’s outburst against the Ordinance as the trigger to clean up the system and check corruption and criminalization. The reality is of course that it was the President’s doubts about the legality of the Ordinance conveyed to cabinet ministers that was seized by the Congress party to enact Rahul Gandhi’s drama in order to obtain credit. The entire issue is being projected by the media and perhaps being swallowed by the public as a great fight against corruption launched by the Congress inspired by Rahul Gandhi. This is laughable. The politicians, the judiciary and the media are living in world of make believe. Consider the reality.

Two MPs, Lalu Yadav and Rashid Masood have been unseated in parliament after being convicted in corruption cases. Their corruption was committed decades ago. Lalu Yadav has been convicted after 17 years and Masood has been convicted after 23 years of their misdemeanors. Even if neither was a sitting MP both would have enjoyed three of four terms of being in parliament before this recent conviction. What kind of fight against corruption and cleansing of parliament is that? Currently there would be a dozen leading MPs involved in corruption during the Commonwealth Games and other mega scams under investigation and facing court proceedings. Will they be unseated after remaining in parliament for the next several terms and being convicted after a few decades?

The prime need is to make mandatory the completion of all court cases within six months so that speedy justice can punish the guilty. That calls for serious judicial reform. Instead of addressing that the obsession with legal nitpicking related to the RP Act through Supreme Court rulings and government Ordinances is meaningless and irrelevant. It is designed only to deceive the public into believing that corruption is genuinely being fought.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

PM’s US trip succeeds despite sabotage! Oct

1

      1 Vote

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to America has been as successful as could be reasonably expected. It was a crucial trip during which the PM met President Obama, Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and heads of other SAARC nations. In his meeting with President Obama a game changing breakthrough was achieved not sufficiently appreciated by analysts. America and India have agreed to become closest partners for defence cooperation. For transfer of defence technology India ’s relations with the US are now at par with Britain.

This is what Pandit Nehru sought from President Kennedy after the Sino-Indian conflict of 1962 when the latter’s death aborted the effort. This is what President Bush sought when he signed the nuclear deal but that effort failed because the Indian government scared of domestic criticism failed to deliver. Now agreement has been reached. The first sign of change is evident from India ’s consent to participate in joint naval exercises in the world’s largest maritime exercise involving dozens of countries. China is not invited to the exercise and the People’s Liberation Army has expressed strong opposition to it. Regardless of the PM’s future the Indo-US deal has been signed. It is likely to endure because it is not between political parties but between governments.

The PM’s meeting with his Pakistani counterpart was as crucial. Though no breakthrough was achieved or attempted the ice was broken. Contrary to the expectations of sceptics the PM addressed India ’s immediate concerns about border violations and terror camps. Mr. Sharif did acknowledge those concerns and promised action to stabilize the border. After he delivers some results the PMs will meet to carry the dialogue further. Already undated invitations for such meeting have been extended. If the PM achieved a big step forward towards the US , he also managed a baby half-step towards Pakistan . Now it remains to be seen how the agreements of this visit actually translate into results.

Anyone following the run-up to the Prime Minister’s visit would marvel at the number of glitches that suddenly erupted to mar its prospects. And for each manufactured event to scuttle progress in the talks the media played its part by a hysterical negative approach to the visit. The opposition parties by their strident criticism of the PM while he was abroad, throwing all accepted diplomatic norms to the winds, also played its part. It is a well established norm that opposition parties do not attack a head of state when he is abroad or when opposition leaders themselves are abroad. This is what democratic bipartisan approach to foreign policy denotes. But the BJP launched a shrill attack against the PM demanding an explanation while he was in the US.

The rot started with Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi. He enacted a preplanned unprecedented theatrical performance to rubbish the PM just hours before he was scheduled to meet President Obama. This demeaned the PM in the eyes of the opposition and demands for his resignation were voiced. It is a reflection of our sick state of politics that even the PM’s former press Advisor Mr. Sanjay Baru was swept along the popular current to advise the PM to resign. It is amazing that not a single voice within or outside the Congress party has made the obvious democratic demand. After the intemperate, ill-timed and irresponsible statement by the ruling party’s vice-president to damage prospects of international negotiations, it is Rahul Gandhi who should be sacked from his post if he does not voluntarily resign.

Why should the PM be asked to quit?

Narendra Modi in a public rally in Delhi lashed out at Gandhi. But he was equally amiss himself. In his speech he sought to damage the PM’s foreign visit by uttering two falsehoods. The first was that the PM had allegedly lamented to Obama that India was a very poor nation in need of help. From where did Modi get his information?

From all accounts the PM discussed terrorism and not India ’s poverty. The second falsehood was even more intriguing. Based upon a TV quote by a noted Pakistani journalist Modi attempted to further muddy the atmosphere just hours before the PM and Nawaz Sharif were to meet. He quoted Pakistani anchor of Geo TV, Hamid Mir, who alleged on TV that Nawaz Sharif had described the PM as a “village woman” pleading before the US President. This was supposed to be said over a breakfast interview given by Sharif to two other journalists and Mir. The two other journalists, Barkha Dutt and a Pakistani journalist Absar Alam, both denied Mir’s version. It seemed that Sharif said that concerns against Pakistan could be addressed directly to Islamabad instead of to Washington.

This was in line with India ’s consistent stand contrary to Pakistan ’s earlier approach that Indo-Pak ties should be bilateral without third party intervention. After Barkha Dutt and Absar Alam rubbished Mir’s claims the latter confessed that Sharif made no criticism of the PM. He lamely tried to explain away his contradicted version by saying that Sharif spoke in jest. But why did not Mir say this in his original comment on TV? In that remark he even indicated that Sharif considered Manmohan Singh weak and was looking forward to doing business with his successor after 2014.

One will not speculate whether all this happened by coincidence or by design, and if by design, the inspiration of these incidents. Hamid Mir is a powerful and influential TV journalist in Pakistan. Currently there are differences between the Pakistan army and the civil government over how to tackle the Taliban. Nawaz Sharif is seeking a dialogue. The army wants to continue with the status quo by “fighting” the Taliban. Mir sympathized with the army by stating:

“It’s a very complicated situation. The army does not seem to be in the mood for talks as it has gained a lot of ground against the Taliban in the recent past.”

Mir should know. He has after all excellent contacts. He was in fact the last journalist to interview slain Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin laden in Afghanistan in 2002. It is difficult to believe that he could have accomplished this without the clearance, if not cooperation, of the ISI.

In summation, Rahul Gandhi, Narendra Modi and Hamid Mir all passed comments that could have damaged the PM’s US visit. Large sections of big business electronic media and the opposition joined them. Modi and Gandhi are repeatedly projected by the media as the two contenders for becoming prime minister. It is ironic that both contenders are on the same side insofar as the PM’s negotiations in the US were concerned. It is also intriguing that these three fed on each other’s narrative to rubbish the PM. But then, this does not necessarily suggest collusion. It could be pure coincidence. As for big business that funds both media and politics it may matter little which contender becomes PM. Heads I win, tails you lose!

For big business Modi and Gandhi might well be two sides of the same coin. But beyond business interests of the corporate sector there are also powerful international forces interested in damaging relations between India and the US , as well as between India and Pakistan . Now which international forces would be pleased if Indo-US and Indo-Pak elations deteriorated? It is for readers to ponder and arrive at their own conclusions.

Image (c) ibnlive.in.com

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

The great Congress mystery! Sep

30

      4 Votes

There is a mystery related to the functioning of the Congress party that nobody I have asked has been able to clear. The latest episode heightens the mystery. The Union cabinet along with the core group of the Congress party in the presence and with the consent of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi approved the draft of the Ordinance to protect criminal MPs. After the Ordinance was presented to the President he expressed doubts about its legality and delayed signing it. Meanwhile the opposition mounted a blistering attack against the Ordinance. Cabinet ministers and Congress party leaders stoutly defended the Ordinance and accused the opposition of being complicit in the decision to draft the Bill protecting criminal MPs.

Then Congress Vice President Mr. Rahul Gandhi without notice intervened in a Congress press conference and condemned the Ordinance in very strong and intemperate language. He did this while the PM was abroad about to hold very crucial meetings with several heads of states. The timing of Mr. Gandhi’s remarks was so significant that had he not been a leader of such limited understanding one might have concluded that he was representing a hostile foreign power seeking to damage India ’s foreign policy.

After Mr. Gandhi spoke the cabinet ministers and Congress party leaders instead of criticizing his performance somersaulted and fell in line making nonsense of their own earlier publicly stated remarks. This writer has never in his long career seen such a craven display of sycophancy and lack of self respect and honour as long as can be remembered.

Here then is the mystery. What is the secret of Mrs. Gandhi’s hold on all members of the Congress party? She cannot get votes. Her party is performing badly even in her own constituency despite campaigning by her and her family members. She has been accused by credible international sources of receiving illegal funds from foreign sources. She has been accused by credible international sources of having a secret illegal foreign bank account. She has never taken the trouble to deny charges. She has not displayed any significant expertise related to economic, foreign or political policy. Her son, Mr. Rahul Gandhi, is even less accomplished than her. There are serious and credible allegations of his having been detained in the US possessing unaccounted money and drugs and subsequently being released through intervention of the Indian government.

Despite all this, Congress party members from top to bottom behave like craven slaves of mother and son. One cannot fathom the reason for this. One would like to be enlightened. In conclusion this writer would like to clarify that he is not critical mainly of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi or Mr. Rahul Gandhi. They look after their interests as all people are expected to. It is the members of the Congress party that attract the strongest possible criticism. So obnoxious and counter productive is their conduct that it strengthens this writer’s belief that the Congress party must be buried in order to preserve Indian democracy.

Share this:

5 Comments

Posted in Nation

Kashmir exposures Convert crisis into opportunity! Sep

27

      1 Vote

Government should not overspend effort to undo the political damage inflicted by the recent leaked allegations by the Ministry of Defence and General VK Singh. The damage to India’s case in Kashmir cannot be undone. Just days after the recent disclosure terrorists have struck in Jammu to kill army and police personnel. More attacks should be expected by terrorists emboldened by the disclosures vindicating their allegations. Politics is about perception of facts and not about facts themselves. The recent disclosures have confirmed in the public mind all the perceived truths about India’s relationship with Kashmir repeatedly articulated by separatists and many other foreign powers. The government should instead seize the moment to convert a setback into opportunity and settle once and for all the Kashmir dispute that has bedeviled the subcontinent’s peace since Independence.

However, in order to attempt that the government must be honest enough to confront the truth and bold enough to dare an initiative.

What is the truth?

One need no iterate the oft repeated facts relating to the Kashmir dispute. Kashmir is not the problem but the symptom of the problem. The problem is the Partition. Kashmir was a state with contiguous borders with both India and Pakistan. The Hindu ruler of this Muslim majority state wanted independence and good relations with both nations. The attack by Pakistani raiders backed by its army to forcibly seize Kashmir forced the ruler’s hands. He acceded to India in order to obtain the Indian army’s help to repulse the enemy.

As Kashmir Chief Minister Mr. Omar Abdullah pointed out recently, Kashmir unlike other princely states of the Indian Union did not merge with India but stopped short after accession. That is why it has a special status and Article 370. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru at the time of accepting Kashmir’s instrument of accession stated that it was “subject to the will of the people of Kashmir”. This was followed by India’s acceptance of the UN Resolution regarding Plebiscite in Kashmir. For over six decades stupid policies pursued by the governments of India and Pakistan, both acting like foreign pawns, has denied the region peace and stability. The distorted approach of both governments that have behaved like Raja Jaichand and Mir Jafar to ally with foreigners against their own flesh and blood has its roots in the Partition.

Britain offered the opportunity to keep India united by presenting the Cabinet Mission Plan that would have created a federation. Jinnah accepted the proposal. Nehru rejected it because the Plan allowed the Muslim dominated units to secede after 10 years if they so wished. Like pathetic colonial minions the leaders of India and Pakistan accepted Independence and Partition without the borders of the new nations determined. Immediately after Independence, accompanied by Partition, riots engineered by interested foreign powers to perpetuate the division cost a million lives within a few months. Similarly the engineered Kashmir dispute led to the partition of the state in order to create a permanent bone of contention that would prevent reunification.

Nehru, who had rejected the Cabinet Mission Plan and a confederation when these were offered, attempted before his death to undo the spirit of the Partition by creating an Indo-Pakistan confederation. In 1959 President Ayub Khan offered joint defence that would have automatically led to a confederation. But the same President Ayub Khan rejected Nehru’s proposal of a confederation presented by Sheikh Abdullah which Jinnah had accepted at the time of the Cabinet Mission Plan. In other words, both India and Pakistan had wanted confederation. But they had wanted it at different times. Therefore they cannot agree. Is this not shocking diplomacy? The absence of statesmanship displayed by leaders of both governments and their readiness to serve foreign interests could not be more glaring.

The latest revelations by the Indian government and General VK Singh have made prospects of reconciliation ever more remote. Peace will come only if the leaders of India and Pakistan are bold enough to cut the Gordian knot and make a dramatic breakthrough. Critics have opposed the proposed meeting between the Prime Ministers of India and Pakistan scheduled for September 29 in New York. BJP leader and former foreign minister Mr. Yashwant Sinha has stated that such a meeting is premature as long as terrorism continues. He suggested that lower officials should first meet. One begs to differ. Even if lower officials meet and people to people contacts continue for a hundred years there will be no progress.

The problem is the trust deficit. That exists between governments and not between peoples. That exists because the armies of both nations are in contention. Only joint defence and operations to wipe out terrorism from the region will remove the trust deficit. There are more victims of terrorism in Pakistan than in India. Prime Minister Mr. Manmohan Singh should bluntly tell Mr. Nawaz Sharif on September 29 that enough is enough. Unless the armies of both nations cooperate there cannot be peace and stability in the region. If even now, when both nations are besieged by terrorism and instability, their governments cannot act rationally, they never will. Without joint defence the trust deficit cannot be removed. If there is joint defence it must inevitably lead to some form of confederation. Both leaders should read the writing on the wall. They should forget what their critics might say today. They should focus on what historians will say tomorrow.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Politicians, Army, playing with fire! Sep

25

      1 Vote

General VK Singh reportedly has decided to file an application with the Right to Information (RTI) commission seeking a copy of General Vinod Bhatia’s secret report on the alleged misuse of the top secret Technical Support Division (TSD) during his tenure as Army Chief. Will the government respond by releasing the secret report? After news of the report appeared in the media the government stated that the report “impinges on matters of national security and, as such, the government will take a decision and further actions after careful examination.” If the contents of the report impinge on national security it is difficult to see how the government can agree to release the report.

However, then a further question is raised. If the report will not be released to the public how was it allowed to be leaked to the media? After the media exposure the government did not deny the report or displayed reticence but went out of its way to acknowledge its contents and resolved to probe the affair. One spokesperson of the Congress party blithely informed TV that since the media had obtained the report the matter had to be fully probed. But the government has not addressed the obvious question of how the media obtained the report. From all accounts it has not ordered an inquiry into who leaked the report and taken steps to punish the guilty. The circumstantial evidence of the government itself leaking the report is compelling. In the pursuit of petty partisan politics was the government oblivious of the grave implications that might flow from the leakage?

That is not all. Politicians further endangered the situation. BJP President Mr. Rajnath Singh defended General VK Singh and charged the UPA government with targeting him because he shared a platform with Mr. Narendra Modi. The Punjab Congress was quick to retaliate. Captain Amarinder Singh reiterated the allegation in the report that General VK Singh had misused TSD to attempt scuttling the appointment of the current Army Chief General Bikram Singh. He challenged Punjab Chief Minister Mr. Prakash Singh Badal to clarify his stand since he was supporting the BJP and Mr. Narendra Modi.

Have India ’s politicians gone stark raving mad? In the pursuit of their stupid and petty rivalries they are creating a situation that could encourage polarization between Hindu and Sikh, between Haryana and Punjab . Whatever the truth of real or imagined differences between army generals, these might be based upon entirely professional grounds. But in public perception the differences could most likely be seen as between communities and states. If such perception is allowed to grow, how will it affect all the ranks in the army?

The TSD unit was conceived and created after the 26/11 terrorist attack in Mumbai. The purpose of this top secret unit was to counter terrorism. Now not only the existence of this top secret unit is blown, but efforts are actually being made to reveal its operations and functioning in order to settle political scores. The most far reaching consequences of this sorry episode might well be General VK Singh rebuttal of the allegations against him publicized by the government. In an interview to Times Now TV channel he furnished damaging details of how the army has been operating in Jammu and Kashmir for the past many decades. His revelations make mockery of India ’s official stand on Kashmir.

One can imagine how gleefully members of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) in China and the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) in Pakistan would be with rapt attention watching the unfolding exposure of the functioning of India’s top secret army unit established to counter terrorism.

Share this:

1 Comment

Posted in Nation

Has Government committed treason? Sep

22

      2 Votes

Not surprisingly the controversy created by the media exposure and its subsequent official confirmation of the alleged misuse of the Technical Services Division (TSD) by former Army Chief General VK Singh is expected to snowball into a major national crisis. But the crisis may not evolve as those who leaked the information might imagine. According to The Indian Express that published the report General Singh had conveyed a warning that if they went ahead and published it “they will get it in the neck”. General Singh reportedly told the Press Trust of India (PTI) news agency that anyone recommending a probe into the functioning of TSD was being nonsensical because its operations were meant to be secret.

General Singh might have enlightened the public a little more. The mere fact that the inquiry into the functioning of TSD was “secret” suggests that the TSD operation was not only secret but probably “top secret”. If that is the case the consequences for the government as well as for media outlets utilized by the government could be very serious. In that event even the existence of TSD should never have been publicized. Further, if there is exposure of the actual working of the top secret unit, leaking information about it may well be considered treasonable under law, regardless of whether infromation is true or false. It involves national security. Such information can help the nation’s enemies. Even knowledge of the existence of TSD can help the nation’s enemies.

Did the government factor this aspect into its calculations before rushing to the media with its leaks? The last on this issue has not been heard. Events thus far may be in fact just the start of a crisis that could traumatize the system.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

President, army and governance! Sep

21

      1 Vote

According to media reports the Defence Ministry constituted a secret Board of Officers body headed by Lt General Vinod Bhatia to probe alleged irregularities committed during the tenure of former Army Chief General VK Singh. It is alleged that General Singh set up a controversial Military Intelligence unit, Technical Services Division (TSD) that misused secret funds to conduct unauthorized covert operations that interfered in domestic politics. According to reports General Bhatia has advised a fuller probe by an external agency like the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The report alleges that TDS misused secret funds in an effort to destabilize the Jammu and Kashmir government, as well as block the promotion of the present Army Chief General Bikram Singh. The media report has furnished details about how these irregularities were sought to be accomplished.

This report was played up as a first page banner in The Indian Express, and appeared as an unobtrusive single column in the inside pages of The Times of India. The Express claims that it tried unsuccessfully to contact General VK Singh but managed to interact through a mutual contact that quoted the General to say that the report was rubbish and the government was motivated by the fact that he had shared a public platform with opposition leader Mr. Narendra Modi. General Bhatia had submitted his report to the Defence Ministry in March this year. This is an amazing episode and offers glaring evidence of how deeply governance and responsibility to preserve national security have sunk. The following questions need to be addressed.

First, now that the report has been quoted in the media it has to be established whether the allegations leveled by General Bhatia’s team of officers are valid. If true it reveals a shocking state of affairs in which a serving Army Chief can so misuse his powers to further political ends unconnected to his call of duty. If untrue, it reveals an equally shocking state of affairs in which politics has infected the armed forces to allow such false and motivated allegations to be made in order to settle differences within the Defence Ministry. Secondly, the report was submitted in March. Why has it surfaced only now almost six months later after the Defence Minister reportedly has got into the act? Does this validate General Singh’s reported comment that he is being targeted only because he shared a public platform with Mr. Narendra Modi? Thirdly, if it be assumed that the report has substance surely there are various discreet methods of addressing the issue, of even indirectly punishing the guilty, and keep the controversy away from public attention?

Transparency in governance is an excellent principle and the media cannot be criticized for playing up the report when offered the chance. But does it behoove a government to throw all considerations of national security to the winds and jeopardize it by publicizing such an episode if indeed it occurred as alleged? What kind of government is ruling India , and what kind of priorities does it have?

Finally, one cannot but reflect once again whether there can ever be accountability in our collapsing democracy unless the President discharges the responsibilities assigned to his post by our Constitution. It is weeks since communal riots exposed the failure of law and order in Uttar Pradesh. Every single party spokesperson has demanded that the government be dismissed. Official spokespersons of the Congress have said that law and order has collapsed. Yet the central government remains a mute spectator although it claims that the rule of law has collapsed in the state. Neither the Prime Minister nor the President has taken a single tiny step to introduce Governor’s rule. The latest episode related to the TSD report has grave implications for the state of affairs in our armed forces as well as for national security. The President as the Supreme Commander of the armed forces is directly responsible to safeguard both. Will he still remain mute?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Modi’s poll campaign error! Sep

19

      Rate This

From all accounts Mr. Narendra Modi’s inaugural campaign rally in Rewari after being anointed Prime Ministerial candidate of the BJP was the largest ever seen in the district. In some of his earlier rallies also common people had flocked to his meetings with great enthusiasm. Obviously, in addition to the formidable publicity and mobilization organized by the RSS and powerful business interests supporting Mr. Modi, certain qualities of his persona too have caught the imagination of the masses. This has been seized by political analysts and his party’s leaders to describe Mr. Modi as the first great national Other Backward Classes (OBC) leader who might become Prime Minister. Media analysts may be forgiven for their ignorance of political ground realities to describe Mr. Modi as a national OBC leader. But surely the poll managers of the BJP ought to have known better?

It is a grievous flaw to describe Mr. Modi as a national OBC icon. Not only are BJP leaders assiduously promoting this image, even Mr. Modi himself seems to have become victim of this flawed propaganda. Mr. Modi belongs to the Ghanchi caste found only in the state of Gujarat . It is a sub-caste in the OBC category. People belonging to the Teli caste in other states may empathize with the Ghanchi caste because of a shared occupational history related to extraction of oil. Otherwise the Ghanchi caste will have little relevance outside Gujarat . Belonging to the Ghanchi caste makes Mr. Modi an OBC leader. It does not make him a national icon of OBC voters. There is no national OBC icon. There cannot be a national OBC icon. There can only be a national icon who is an OBC. The distinction should be appreciated.

The very logic of caste identity runs counter to a nationwide OBC identity. Caste mobilization becomes easy precisely because the approach is tribal. Caste leaders often unite to make common cause. That makes it easy and convenient for the big business corporate sector to use money power to split or align political forces to suit their interest. But when have castes en block voted for a leader belonging to another caste because of his OBC status? Why do not the Kurmis in Bihar vote for Mr. Laloo Yadav, or the Yadavs vote for Mr. Nitish Kumar? Before Mr. Modi became his party’s election campaign chief the BJP had already laid the ground for positive poll results in UP after Mr. Rajnath Singh brought back Mr. Kalyan Singh into his party’s fold. The revived Thakur-Kurmi alliance had earlier brought the BJP its largest ever parliamentry tally of 57 MPs. With Miss Uma Bharati entering UP politics, in addition to her oratory expected to consolidate the Hindutva vote bank, she will also undoubtedly attract Lodh voters belonging to her caste.

Yet media analysts and BJP poll managers are busy trying to exploit Mr. Modi’s OBC status to project him as the first great OBC national leader who might become Prime Minister. Unfortunately, Mr. Modi has bought this flawed approach. Celebrating his birthday recently in Gujarat Mr. Modi reached out and invited many OBC leaders of the organized and unorganized sectors to his function. National thinking has become so corrupted and distorted by the caste reservation policy and mobilization of quick vote banks that an obvious truth escaped media analysts as well as the poll campaign managers of the BJP. If enthusiastic masses have flocked to Mr. Modi’s rallies it is not because he is a national OBC icon. It is because people have recognized that Mr. Modi has risen from very humble origins like themselves to acquire a national political status. If the masses empathize with Mr. Modi it is not because he is an OBC but because he was poor and is now powerful.

The flawed approach adopted by Mr. Modi and the BJP regarding the importance of his OBC status can have very far reaching consequences. It will determine what kind of Indian will emerge tomorrow if Mr. Modi does become Prime Minister. On his birthday Mr. Modi invited OBC leaders belonging to the organized and unorganized sectors of labour. OBC leaders can mobilize votes. That is an understandably attractive attribute. But so can union leaders of organized and unorganized labour mobilize voters. Why could not Mr. Modi have focused on them instead? Does Mr. Modi seek an India of his dreams symbolized by his proposed Statue of Unity to consolidate on the prevalent national divisive culture based upon over 4000 contending castes battling for economic crumbs?

Or does he seek to create a new Indian with a national identity above caste and community ready to confront the 21st century world? Will he support caste-based reservation or economic criteria for job and educational reservation? Will he promote universal compulsory primary education to lift all castes from poverty? These are some questions that Mr. Modi and the leaders of the BJP need to ponder if they seek a genuine political change. They have to decide whether they want victory in the present or a victory for the future. Do they want to cater to India of the present or to India of the future that will belong to the young?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Modi’s proposed Statue of Unity! Sep

17

      1 Vote

Concluding his first public rally in Rewari after being anointed Prime Ministerial candidate of the BJP, Mr. Narendra Modi appealed to his audience to donate pieces of iron from each village in the state to be used for constructing his proposed Statue of Unity on the sea coast of Gujarat . Mr. Modi wants similar donations of iron pieces from each village in each state across the nation in honour of Sardar Vallabhai Patel who will symbolize unity in the proposed statue. Mr. Modi has declared his intention of constructing the tallest statue in the world, taller than America ’s Statue of Liberty, in honour of Sardar Patel.

This writer has serious objection to the proposal. Sardar Patel was undoubtedly a very great man, as were Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru. Patel performed great service to the nation by unifying the princely states of India after Independence . But though these great leaders did great things for the nation they also committed unforgivable errors the consequence of which continue to haunt our nation. These leaders, mainly Sardar Patel, united Bharat but they divided India . They divided India without the slightest justification. They divided India because they allowed themselves to be influenced and manipulated by the British.

With just over 1000 people killed in Punjab through communal riots engineered by the British administration immediately after Lord Mountbatten became India ’s Viceroy, and about 12000 killed in Bihar and Bengal over a period of two years, these leaders violated their solemn pledge to the people of India by accepting Partition. Gandhi on the fateful day, June 3, 1947 when the Congress formally accepted Partition, conveniently observed his ‘day of silence’. Nehru and Patel were the hawks in the Congress Working Committee in favour of accepting Partition. JB Kripalani, Jayaprakash Narain and Ram Manohar Lohia who opposed Partition were overruled by the rest. On June 2, on eve of the decision, Gandhi assured Mountbatten who visited him that he would not create any hurdles against the decision.

In what manner then might Sardar Patel symbolize unity? After two lawyers from Gujarat, Gandhi and Jinnah, and two aristocrats from Uttar Pradesh, Nehru and Liaquat Ali, butchered and cut asunder Punjab and Bengal displaying their ignorance about the ground realities in these states, people today should display some sensitivity towards the sentiments of provinces where over a million people were slaughtered and over ten million rendered homeless due to the follies of these leaders. In case critics challenge this view about the unforgivable decision about the Partition, let them note that both Gandhi and Nehru acknowledged their error. Gandhi wanted to settle down in Pakistan to undo the Partition just before he was assassinated thanks to ignored security measures during Sardar Patel’s tenure as Home Minister. Nehru sent Sheikh Abdullah to Pakistan to plead with President Ayub Khan to reunite India and Pakistan through a proposed confederation during which effort he died.

Therefore this writer would like to remind Mr. Narendra Modi and many others from different parts of India that they may have their history and may choose to honour whom they wish. The peoples of Punjab and Bengal have their own history and their own memories to recall. Congress leaders today may be the best in the land. They are welcome to govern India . But the Congress Party as Imperial Britain’s instrument to partition India deserves to be buried. Let Congress leaders reinvent themselves into a new organization. After all, this demand merely echoes the last wish of the most revered Congress icon, Mahatma Gandhi, on the day before he died.

Mr. Modi is welcome to construct his Statue of Unity. The people of Punjab and Bengal might seek their own way of responding to history. Human folly can delay but not derail history. Ultimately, cultural nationalism will triumph.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Profit & Loss of UP riots! Sep

14

      Rate This

All political parties and media outlets seem agreed that the recent Muzzafarnagar riots which cost 40 lives and brought untold misery to thousands who fled their homes, were the result of a conspiracy. But all seem to disagree about who was behind the conspiracy. The UP government was suspiciously lax in acting on warnings issued by the central government months earlier. Inexplicably it allowed a Jat mahapanchayat of 1.5 lakh people just 20 km from Muzaffarnagar in violation of prohibitory orders in force in the entire district due to prevailing tension. Thousands of vehicles and tractors from Haryana, Delhi and the neighbouring districts of UP were allowed to descend on the venue of the mahapanchayat. One UP minister has acknowledged that there was an administrative lapse. Samajwadi Party (SP) leader Mr. Mulayam Singh was at pains to stress that the riots were not communal but ethnic – between Jats and Muslims. Chief Minister Mr. Akhilesh Yadav has accused other political parties for the conspiracy.

The UP administration has charged that a five minute fake video was used to fan violence. One BJP leader has been arrested in connection with that video. The district administration of Muzafarnagar lodged criminal cases against a senior BJP leader and former minister along with three other BJP leaders for violating the prohibitory order and allegedly delivered provocative speeches during the Jat mahapanchayat. The BJP leaders have denied charges. Leaders of the Bharat Kisan Union (BKU) and the Congress were also charged on similar grounds. Allegations and counter allegations of conspiracy to instigate the riots flew thick and fast between the BJP, SP, Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) and Congress. However, it is futile to speculate who was behind the conspiracy. It is futile to speculate that if there was indeed a conspiracy, whether it was the work of individual politicians or was it sanctioned by their respective political organizations. What can be assessed with some accuracy is the political impact of riots. Which party gained, and which party lost?

The SP is a huge loser. It is likely to lose its Muslim vote which is vital for its electoral success. Had Muzzafarnagar limited itself to communal tension the SP would have gained. That explains the seemingly deliberate administrative dereliction of duty. The Muslims of West UP who supported Mr. Ajit Singh’s Rashtriya Lok DaL (RLD) might have been weaned away to support SP. But things got out of hand. The Jat mahapanchayat was followed by horrendous riots. The government’s failure has left the Muslim community bitter and alienated.

The BSP could be a gainer. The first Muslim priority as of present is to remove this government. In the assembly elections the BSP offers the best chance of doing it. Similarly the Congress could be a gainer. For parliamentary elections the Muslim vote will attempt to block the BJP. On present reckoning the Congress provides the only hope of accomplishing that.

The BJP is the biggest gainer. Notwithstanding Mr. Mulayam Singh’s nitpicking distinction between communal riots and ethnic riots, the accession of the Jat vote to the BJP, along with widespread communal polarization following the riots across the state, could provide a huge boost to BJP prospects.

The RLD is the biggest loser. The traditional harmony between Muslims and Jats carefully nurtured by the late Choudhary Charan Singh rendered West UP a solid base for the RLD. That harmony has been shattered. The cost of this division will be very heavy. It could destroy the dream of carving a new state of Harit Pradesh in West UP. Both the Jats and the Muslims yearned for it. The Muslims are one third of the population in the region. The Deoband centre of religious learning is in the region. The destruction of the fine balance between Jats and Muslims may be irreparable for a long time. Both communities may now repent at leisure.

It is in this cynical way that politicians will calculate the outcome of the Muzzafarnagar riots. They will not spare a thought for the heartrending tragedy befallen to innocent women and children. Their crime was that they belonged to a community. Their weakness was that they were poor. Their tragedy was that they lived in a country where politics is conducted by a cynical, cruel and corrupt class of leaders.

Share this:

1 Comment

Posted in Nation

Modified Modi! Sep

12

      2 Votes

According to media reports the BJP will formally anoint Mr. Narendra Modi as its Prime Ministerial candidate when the party’s parliamentary board meeting is held on Friday. Some time earlier the view had been expressed in these columns that there was no substantive difference between Prime Minister Mr. Manmohan Singh and Mr. Narendra Modi insofar as approach to economic policy was concerned. Both leaders seem to be focused mainly on quick growth based upon foreign investment and delivery of maximum facilities to the big corporate sector.

However, this writer deemed Mr. Modi superior because he was described as a “muscular” version of the Prime Minister. In Gujarat he offered quicker and smoother delivery to big business than the Prime Minister could at the centre. The reason was simple. There was no extra constitutional authority to derail and slow down Mr. Modi in Gujarat as the office of the National Advisory Council did to the Prime Minister in Delhi . The Prime Minister was helpless. He was appointed by Mrs. Sonia Gandhi and had to function under her direction. It was thought that Mr. Modi would have no such fetters to implement the economic model in which the Prime Minister reposed his faith. That view it seems was too hasty. Mr. Modi may in fact be no more muscular than the Prime Minister.

Recent events should leave no doubt that if Mr. Modi is declared as the BJP’s Prime Ministerial candidate it will be only due to the pressure exerted by the RSS on the party. The RSS has appointed Mr. Modi as the party’s Prime Ministerial candidate and left it to the party to announce the decision. Mr. Modi cannot be unaware of the crucial RSS support needed for his elevation. The support reportedly was promised after extended parleys and eventually the decision was taken after agreement was reached on the minimum demands conveyed by the RSS. According to media reports the four conditions set by the RSS for Mr. Modi to receive support were to pledge building a grand Ram Temple in Ayodhya, to enforce the contentious Uniform Civil Code across the country, to repeal of Article 370 in J&K and end the special status of the state, and to press for full protection of cows. All four conditions reflect policies of traditional Hindutva.

However, the merits or otherwise of the policies insisted upon by the RSS are not important. What is significant is that the RSS is insistent upon the implementation of its agenda. Like Mrs. Sonia Gandhi choosing Mr. Manmohan Singh as Prime Minister, the RSS has chosen Mr. Modi as its candidate. But unlike Mrs. Gandhi who established her National Advisory Council to offer policy directives to the government after Mr. Manmohan Singh assumed office, Mr. Mohan Bhagwat has not wasted time. He has already laid down the minimum policy agenda. This is just the start.

Many more policy directives should be expected if Mr. Modi does indeed become Prime Minister. Although Mr. Modi therefore may not prove to be a more muscular version of Mr. Manmohan Singh, constrained as he will be by an extra constitutional body, Mr. Mohan Bhagwat certainly is showing signs of being a much more muscular version of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi. This aspect needs to be considered carefully by all the supporters of Mr. Modi. It should be amply clear that apart from support by members of the public Mr. Modi is heavily backed by the most powerful big business corporate sector. Apart from Mr. Modi’s own undoubted attributes, his popularity depends heavily on the massive support rendered to him by the big business electronic media. There is nothing surprising about that. Big business will protect its own interests. But a serious question arises.

Many supporters of Mr. Modi draw comfort from the fact that he has not personally referred to any of the pro-Hindu policies associated with the hardcore Hindutva elements of the RSS. These supporters are being delusional. They betray their ignorance about how politics is played out. The approval of every action and every statement by any of the sources in the BJP will devolve on Mr. Modi as the election campaign in charge. His silence is meaningless. Silence will be taken as assent. If Mr. Modi disapproves of any policy or statement by members of his party he will have to contradict them publicly to record his dissent. Voters are influenced by whole parties and not by their perception of any one individual, however powerful or charismatic.

What should be clear therefore to all supporters of Mr. Modi, especially the powerful big business elements, is that the RSS agenda must be factored in their calculations. This is because Mr. Modi and RSS will be inseparable if he becomes the Prime Minister. There will be nothing wrong with that if Mr. Modi and the RSS see eye to eye on all policy matters. If on the other hand Mr. Modi’s personal predilection is at variance from the RSS, there could be a very serious problem. In that event Mr. Modi’s government could become as paralyzed as Mr. Manmohan Singh’s government. There would be precisely the same kind of diarchy in governance as paralyzed the UPA government. The paralysis in the UPA government became so palpable that even Congress General Secretary Mr. Digvijay Singh was constrained to acknowledge publicly that the existing system of diarchy was undesirable.

The powerful vested interests favouring Mr. Modi should therefore carefully scrutinize the total RSS agenda in order to continue their support. This applies to all the international big business executives who descended from Europe and South America to endorse Mr. Modi, to all the young Indians who seek a modern twenty-first century nation and look up to Mr. Modi, to all the biggest business houses in the nation who are solidly backing Mr. Modi, and to all the mainstream media TV anchors who swoon with excitement each time Mr. Modi sneezes. It is entirely possible of course that the RSS policies may exceed their wildest dreams of promoting economic growth and progress in India . But that is a prospect it would be more prudent for them to assess now instead of later. What needs to be understood is that either Mr. Modi is totally supportive of RSS policies, or if he is not, there are prospects once again of paralyzing diarchy that could ruin governance in India.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Post navigation← Older posts

Media’s response to Pak Envoy! Oct

9

      1 Vote

During a press interview to a foreign journalist President Pranab Mukherjee said that even if cross border terrorism was perpetrated by non-state actors as Islamabad claimed, the Pakistan government could not evade responsibility. The territory was under the jurisdiction of the government, the President pointed out. “Non-state actors do not descend from heaven,

” he said. This view was echoed by Information and Broadcasting (I&B) Minister Mr. Manish Tewari who told media that the crossing over by terrorists and non-state actors suggested either complicity or negligence by the Pakistan government. “Obviously these terrorists or non-state actors are not coming out of a vacuum,”

he said.

The Pakistan High Commissioner to India Mr. Salman Bashir gave a veiled rejoinder to these remarks. But he focused his criticism mainly against the media. He accused the media of focusing exclusively on “so-called” incursions and infiltrations from across the border.

He said:

“Whoever is making the argument that they have not descended from heaven, I want to ask who are these thousands of people who are involved in heinous acts of terrorism in Pakistan . Have they descended from heaven? We agree they have not descended from heaven, from where are they being funded and sourced?”

One can appreciate the constraints under which Pakistan ’s official envoy to India has to function. Mr. Bashir said something, and he implied something. Both his assertion and implication deserve attention. Since he thought it fit to direct his ire against the Indian media this writer takes the liberty of directly responding to his criticism.

Mr. Bashir cannot blame the Indian media of responding to continued incursions from across the border which for diplomatic compulsions he described as “so-called”. But he was right to point out the failure of the Indian government as well as the media to adequately differentiate between the government and non-state actors in Pakistan . Mr. Bashir has rightly asserted that “thousands of terrorists” are operating against Pakistan who obviously did not descend from heaven. By implication this is tacit admission of failure of the Pakistan government. It is a fact that there are substantially more victims of terrorism in Pakistan than in India including in the state of J&K. Then Mr. Bashir went on to question the source of funding and training of these terrorists. His central plea was for the enhancement of cooperation between Islamabad and New Delhi.

He said:

“We have evidence which we have shared and are prepared to share with the rest of the world and particularly with the government of India on fuelling of acts of terrorism in Pakistan .”

Mr. Bashir’s plea for greater cooperation between India and Pakistan to fight terror clearly indicates that by questioning the source of terror funding he was not pointing a finger at India . He was obviously indicating the hand of Al Qaeda which inspires global terrorism. In the light of the reality of terrorist activity in Pakistan funded and directed by global forces the Indian government is clearly remiss in not taking an initiative for closer cooperation with Pakistan to combat terror. New Delhi ’s inhibition may be explained by its continued doubts about how deeply subverted Pakistan ’s security establishment is by pro-terror elements. Well, the Indian media has no such inhibitions. Since Mr. Bashir squarely blamed the Indian media I take the liberty of directly addressing him. I put a question to the Pakistan government through him that the Indian government has failed to do.

Mr. Bashir you seek closer cooperation between India and Pakistan , you admit that there are thousands of terrorists operating inside Pakistan . You indicate that they are funded and directed from abroad. You tacitly imply though you do not state that they cannot operate without help from a section of the official machinery. I agree with your overall analysis. My question is: Will the Pakistan government accept an offer of joint intelligence and joint operations against terror to wipe out these non-state actors from both our countries?

I know that you may not deign to respond to such a question from a mere media person instead of from the government. But let me assure you. If you do answer the media will compel the Indian government to respond appropriately.

So will you respond?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

The President’s curious priorities! Oct

8

      1 Vote

After the media pointed out that the credit for the rollback of the Ordinance on convicted MPs went to President Pranab Mukherjee and not to Congress Vice-President Rahul Gandhi who exploited the President’s known reluctance to sign it, Mr. LK Advani praised the President for his decision. However, the President reacted to this praise most curiously. The President with uncalled for modesty went out of his way to dissociate himself from the decision to roll back the Ordinance. It is known that he sat over the Ordinance and was reluctant to sign it. By signing it he could have possibly attracted strictures from the Supreme Court to make his position untenable. Understandably he mulled over the matter and shared his views with UPA Ministers who called on him to discuss the Ordinance. It was after that when Mr. Rahul Gandhi jumped into the controversy to corner credit. Mr. Advani’s praise for the President therefore was a routine and unexceptionable observation.

However the President reacted to the media in response to such praise by saying:

“I cannot comment on what the Opposition has said about my role. My duties are now completely determined by the Indian Constitution.”

The praise for the President was precisely because he did follow the Constitution by not immediately signing the Ordinance. Why, then, his curiously defensive rejoinder? Eyebrows were further raised after the President’s son, Mr. Abhijeet Mukherjee, called on the chief victim of the scrapped Ordinance, Mr. Lalu Prasad Yadav, who was in jail. The popular conclusion derived from this visit was that Mr. Mukherjee had gone there to convince Mr. Yadav that the decision not to sign the Ordinance reflected no personal motive of the President but was dictated by the Constitution. This was unnecessary. Mr. Yadav one is sure is sufficiently knowledgeable to have been aware of that. If such speculation has any basis it is certainly odd that the President should be so concerned about Mr. Yadav’s feelings. The President after all is above party politics.

Alas, it does not seem that the President is as much above party politics as he should be. His continued silence over the horrendous events in Andhra is equally mystifying. After the Union government hastily declared the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh by ceding the new state of Telangana despite the state assembly being overwhelmingly opposed to the measure, the entire state is in flames. Apart from mammoth public protest and indefinite fasts launched by politicians, the whole state is without electric power because of a strike by workers. And this situation has been growing and worsening for days. Has not the Constitutional machinery in the state collapsed to necessitate the application of Article 356 to impose President’s rule in Andhra to restore order? But the Prime Minister and the Union cabinet are mute.

Surprisingly, even the President is silent. Article 78 (b) of the Constitution states: “It shall be the duty of the Prime Minister to furnish such information relating to the administration of the affairs of the Union and proposals for legislation as the President may call for.” Should not the President invoke this Article and initiate action? Surely the millions of agitated people in Andhra Pradesh deserve as much attention as Mr. Lalu Yadav should get?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Snooping, security and privacy! Oct

5

      1 Vote

After Julian Assange and the Wikileaks controversy it is the Edgar Snowden affair that has rocked the world. Snowden was a government contractor working at the National Security Agency (NSA) in America. The NSA in order to protect the US snoops on citizens in America and abroad looking for terrorist connections. The NSA collects and analyses foreign communication and foreign signals of intelligence in order to protect the US. In an interview in Hong Kong Snowden leaked top-secret government surveillance programs that led to an international debate over national security versus individual privacy. In a recent statement to the European Parliament Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Snowden said:

“A culture of secrecy has denied our societies the opportunity to determine the appropriate balance between the human right of privacy and the governmental interest in investigation.”

Among Snowden’s leaks was information about secret US surveillance of foreign governments including Brazil and India. The Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff in protest lashed out at the US in the UN General Assembly and canceled her official visit to Washington. Critics in India not only criticized the US but berated the Indian government after disclosures that it had also like America and China snooped on citizens.

Whatever the extent of public outrage over official snooping, it will not and cannot stop. The world needs a reality check. As long as terrorism survives in the world and weapons of mass destruction can be manufactured by private citizens in a garage, surveillance is a survival imperative for governments. What is required is that such surveillance by all governments be monitored and controlled by the UN.

Technology has not only enabled private citizens to manufacture weapons of mass destruction, but also to snoop on governments and citizens alike. In the foreseeable future therefore privacy cannot be guaranteed for any citizen or government. In the event is it not prudent for people to adjust to the new reality? In other words technology will render total transparency for governments and private citizens unavoidable. It will signify a game changing new culture for mankind. Should not people therefore start adjusting to this change and make their lives totally transparent? It may lead to a happier and safer world.

Indeed, there could well be advantages in being snooped upon! While many people criticize the government’s snooping policy, so do I but for different reasons. My complaint is that the government does not bug my telephone, hack my computer or bug my regular haunts where I have coffee sessions with friends. I want to be heard but nobody listens. Does the government think that it is only the rich and the powerful that can provide useful information?

So can ordinary people like this writer. The government should bug ordinary people too in order to create a level playing field. Not only Neera Radia and Amar Singh are worth snooping on. People like me too have valuable ideas that would help the government. Alas! All my ideas and the pearls of wisdom exchanged with friends go waste because the government does not snoop on me. If the government were to do so would not some of that wisdom penetrate the dense minds of our rulers to improve governance and conditions in our nation?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Politics of convicted MPs! Oct

3

      1 Vote

The current controversy over the Supreme Court (SC) judgment and the government’s Ordinance on the continuance of convicted MPs in legislatures needs to be appreciated in its proper perspective. Right now corruption is a very emotive issue. The public not surprisingly has jumped to the conclusion that the Ordinance which sought to overrule the SC judgment was part of political chicanery. But to what extent does the SC judgment or for that matter the Ordinance actually affect the prevalence of corruption in the system? Is everybody in the government, parliament and judiciary missing the wood for the trees?

The existing Representation of Peoples (RP) Act was challenged by two writ petitions filed by advocate Lily Thomas and Lok Prahari, through its General Secretary S. N. Shukla. The petitioners questioned the legality of MPs continuing in parliament despite conviction by obtaining a stay order and further hearing from a higher court. The SC considered the RP Act unconstitutional and ruled that immediately after conviction the MP with a sentence of two or more years.must be disqualified. The Union cabinet drafted an ordinance to neutralize the Supreme Court’s order mandating immediate disqualification. The government held that if the conviction was stayed by the higher court within 90 days the elected representative should not be disqualified. But the government in its ordinance denied the convicted MP perks and voting rights till being cleared by a higher court. Only, the MP’s seat would remain occupied and there would be no by-election.

Recognizing ground realities the government considered the ease with which motivated and fraudulent prosecution and conviction could be secured from lower courts to harm even innocent politicians. Law Minister Kapil Sibal said that “everybody knows the judicial system has miserably failed to save itself from corruption charges and nepotism”. Even though the Ordinance remedy may be flawed the truth of judicial corruption cannot be denied and has indeed been voiced by Supreme Court judges and reputed jurists.

The media has gone to town attributing Rahul Gandhi’s outburst against the Ordinance as the trigger to clean up the system and check corruption and criminalization. The reality is of course that it was the President’s doubts about the legality of the Ordinance conveyed to cabinet ministers that was seized by the Congress party to enact Rahul Gandhi’s drama in order to obtain credit. The entire issue is being projected by the media and perhaps being swallowed by the public as a great fight against corruption launched by the Congress inspired by Rahul Gandhi. This is laughable. The politicians, the judiciary and the media are living in world of make believe. Consider the reality.

Two MPs, Lalu Yadav and Rashid Masood have been unseated in parliament after being convicted in corruption cases. Their corruption was committed decades ago. Lalu Yadav has been convicted after 17 years and Masood has been convicted after 23 years of their misdemeanors. Even if neither was a sitting MP both would have enjoyed three of four terms of being in parliament before this recent conviction. What kind of fight against corruption and cleansing of parliament is that? Currently there would be a dozen leading MPs involved in corruption during the Commonwealth Games and other mega scams under investigation and facing court proceedings. Will they be unseated after remaining in parliament for the next several terms and being convicted after a few decades?

The prime need is to make mandatory the completion of all court cases within six months so that speedy justice can punish the guilty. That calls for serious judicial reform. Instead of addressing that the obsession with legal nitpicking related to the RP Act through Supreme Court rulings and government Ordinances is meaningless and irrelevant. It is designed only to deceive the public into believing that corruption is genuinely being fought.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

PM’s US trip succeeds despite sabotage! Oct

1

      1 Vote

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to America has been as successful as could be reasonably expected. It was a crucial trip during which the PM met President Obama, Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and heads of other SAARC nations. In his meeting with President Obama a game changing breakthrough was achieved not sufficiently appreciated by analysts. America and India have agreed to become closest partners for defence cooperation. For transfer of defence technology India ’s relations with the US are now at par with Britain.

This is what Pandit Nehru sought from President Kennedy after the Sino-Indian conflict of 1962 when the latter’s death aborted the effort. This is what President Bush sought when he signed the nuclear deal but that effort failed because the Indian government scared of domestic criticism failed to deliver. Now agreement has been reached. The first sign of change is evident from India ’s consent to participate in joint naval exercises in the world’s largest maritime exercise involving dozens of countries. China is not invited to the exercise and the People’s Liberation Army has expressed strong opposition to it. Regardless of the PM’s future the Indo-US deal has been signed. It is likely to endure because it is not between political parties but between governments.

The PM’s meeting with his Pakistani counterpart was as crucial. Though no breakthrough was achieved or attempted the ice was broken. Contrary to the expectations of sceptics the PM addressed India ’s immediate concerns about border violations and terror camps. Mr. Sharif did acknowledge those concerns and promised action to stabilize the border. After he delivers some results the PMs will meet to carry the dialogue further. Already undated invitations for such meeting have been extended. If the PM achieved a big step forward towards the US , he also managed a baby half-step towards Pakistan . Now it remains to be seen how the agreements of this visit actually translate into results.

Anyone following the run-up to the Prime Minister’s visit would marvel at the number of glitches that suddenly erupted to mar its prospects. And for each manufactured event to scuttle progress in the talks the media played its part by a hysterical negative approach to the visit. The opposition parties by their strident criticism of the PM while he was abroad, throwing all accepted diplomatic norms to the winds, also played its part. It is a well established norm that opposition parties do not attack a head of state when he is abroad or when opposition leaders themselves are abroad. This is what democratic bipartisan approach to foreign policy denotes. But the BJP launched a shrill attack against the PM demanding an explanation while he was in the US.

The rot started with Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi. He enacted a preplanned unprecedented theatrical performance to rubbish the PM just hours before he was scheduled to meet President Obama. This demeaned the PM in the eyes of the opposition and demands for his resignation were voiced. It is a reflection of our sick state of politics that even the PM’s former press Advisor Mr. Sanjay Baru was swept along the popular current to advise the PM to resign. It is amazing that not a single voice within or outside the Congress party has made the obvious democratic demand. After the intemperate, ill-timed and irresponsible statement by the ruling party’s vice-president to damage prospects of international negotiations, it is Rahul Gandhi who should be sacked from his post if he does not voluntarily resign.

Why should the PM be asked to quit?

Narendra Modi in a public rally in Delhi lashed out at Gandhi. But he was equally amiss himself. In his speech he sought to damage the PM’s foreign visit by uttering two falsehoods. The first was that the PM had allegedly lamented to Obama that India was a very poor nation in need of help. From where did Modi get his information?

From all accounts the PM discussed terrorism and not India ’s poverty. The second falsehood was even more intriguing. Based upon a TV quote by a noted Pakistani journalist Modi attempted to further muddy the atmosphere just hours before the PM and Nawaz Sharif were to meet. He quoted Pakistani anchor of Geo TV, Hamid Mir, who alleged on TV that Nawaz Sharif had described the PM as a “village woman” pleading before the US President. This was supposed to be said over a breakfast interview given by Sharif to two other journalists and Mir. The two other journalists, Barkha Dutt and a Pakistani journalist Absar Alam, both denied Mir’s version. It seemed that Sharif said that concerns against Pakistan could be addressed directly to Islamabad instead of to Washington.

This was in line with India ’s consistent stand contrary to Pakistan ’s earlier approach that Indo-Pak ties should be bilateral without third party intervention. After Barkha Dutt and Absar Alam rubbished Mir’s claims the latter confessed that Sharif made no criticism of the PM. He lamely tried to explain away his contradicted version by saying that Sharif spoke in jest. But why did not Mir say this in his original comment on TV? In that remark he even indicated that Sharif considered Manmohan Singh weak and was looking forward to doing business with his successor after 2014.

One will not speculate whether all this happened by coincidence or by design, and if by design, the inspiration of these incidents. Hamid Mir is a powerful and influential TV journalist in Pakistan. Currently there are differences between the Pakistan army and the civil government over how to tackle the Taliban. Nawaz Sharif is seeking a dialogue. The army wants to continue with the status quo by “fighting” the Taliban. Mir sympathized with the army by stating:

“It’s a very complicated situation. The army does not seem to be in the mood for talks as it has gained a lot of ground against the Taliban in the recent past.”

Mir should know. He has after all excellent contacts. He was in fact the last journalist to interview slain Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin laden in Afghanistan in 2002. It is difficult to believe that he could have accomplished this without the clearance, if not cooperation, of the ISI.

In summation, Rahul Gandhi, Narendra Modi and Hamid Mir all passed comments that could have damaged the PM’s US visit. Large sections of big business electronic media and the opposition joined them. Modi and Gandhi are repeatedly projected by the media as the two contenders for becoming prime minister. It is ironic that both contenders are on the same side insofar as the PM’s negotiations in the US were concerned. It is also intriguing that these three fed on each other’s narrative to rubbish the PM. But then, this does not necessarily suggest collusion. It could be pure coincidence. As for big business that funds both media and politics it may matter little which contender becomes PM. Heads I win, tails you lose!

For big business Modi and Gandhi might well be two sides of the same coin. But beyond business interests of the corporate sector there are also powerful international forces interested in damaging relations between India and the US , as well as between India and Pakistan . Now which international forces would be pleased if Indo-US and Indo-Pak elations deteriorated? It is for readers to ponder and arrive at their own conclusions.

Image (c) ibnlive.in.com

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

The great Congress mystery! Sep

30

      4 Votes

There is a mystery related to the functioning of the Congress party that nobody I have asked has been able to clear. The latest episode heightens the mystery. The Union cabinet along with the core group of the Congress party in the presence and with the consent of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi approved the draft of the Ordinance to protect criminal MPs. After the Ordinance was presented to the President he expressed doubts about its legality and delayed signing it. Meanwhile the opposition mounted a blistering attack against the Ordinance. Cabinet ministers and Congress party leaders stoutly defended the Ordinance and accused the opposition of being complicit in the decision to draft the Bill protecting criminal MPs.

Then Congress Vice President Mr. Rahul Gandhi without notice intervened in a Congress press conference and condemned the Ordinance in very strong and intemperate language. He did this while the PM was abroad about to hold very crucial meetings with several heads of states. The timing of Mr. Gandhi’s remarks was so significant that had he not been a leader of such limited understanding one might have concluded that he was representing a hostile foreign power seeking to damage India ’s foreign policy.

After Mr. Gandhi spoke the cabinet ministers and Congress party leaders instead of criticizing his performance somersaulted and fell in line making nonsense of their own earlier publicly stated remarks. This writer has never in his long career seen such a craven display of sycophancy and lack of self respect and honour as long as can be remembered.

Here then is the mystery. What is the secret of Mrs. Gandhi’s hold on all members of the Congress party? She cannot get votes. Her party is performing badly even in her own constituency despite campaigning by her and her family members. She has been accused by credible international sources of receiving illegal funds from foreign sources. She has been accused by credible international sources of having a secret illegal foreign bank account. She has never taken the trouble to deny charges. She has not displayed any significant expertise related to economic, foreign or political policy. Her son, Mr. Rahul Gandhi, is even less accomplished than her. There are serious and credible allegations of his having been detained in the US possessing unaccounted money and drugs and subsequently being released through intervention of the Indian government.

Despite all this, Congress party members from top to bottom behave like craven slaves of mother and son. One cannot fathom the reason for this. One would like to be enlightened. In conclusion this writer would like to clarify that he is not critical mainly of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi or Mr. Rahul Gandhi. They look after their interests as all people are expected to. It is the members of the Congress party that attract the strongest possible criticism. So obnoxious and counter productive is their conduct that it strengthens this writer’s belief that the Congress party must be buried in order to preserve Indian democracy.

Share this:

5 Comments

Posted in Nation

Kashmir exposures Convert crisis into opportunity! Sep

27

      1 Vote

Government should not overspend effort to undo the political damage inflicted by the recent leaked allegations by the Ministry of Defence and General VK Singh. The damage to India’s case in Kashmir cannot be undone. Just days after the recent disclosure terrorists have struck in Jammu to kill army and police personnel. More attacks should be expected by terrorists emboldened by the disclosures vindicating their allegations. Politics is about perception of facts and not about facts themselves. The recent disclosures have confirmed in the public mind all the perceived truths about India’s relationship with Kashmir repeatedly articulated by separatists and many other foreign powers. The government should instead seize the moment to convert a setback into opportunity and settle once and for all the Kashmir dispute that has bedeviled the subcontinent’s peace since Independence.

However, in order to attempt that the government must be honest enough to confront the truth and bold enough to dare an initiative.

What is the truth?

One need no iterate the oft repeated facts relating to the Kashmir dispute. Kashmir is not the problem but the symptom of the problem. The problem is the Partition. Kashmir was a state with contiguous borders with both India and Pakistan. The Hindu ruler of this Muslim majority state wanted independence and good relations with both nations. The attack by Pakistani raiders backed by its army to forcibly seize Kashmir forced the ruler’s hands. He acceded to India in order to obtain the Indian army’s help to repulse the enemy.

As Kashmir Chief Minister Mr. Omar Abdullah pointed out recently, Kashmir unlike other princely states of the Indian Union did not merge with India but stopped short after accession. That is why it has a special status and Article 370. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru at the time of accepting Kashmir’s instrument of accession stated that it was “subject to the will of the people of Kashmir”. This was followed by India’s acceptance of the UN Resolution regarding Plebiscite in Kashmir. For over six decades stupid policies pursued by the governments of India and Pakistan, both acting like foreign pawns, has denied the region peace and stability. The distorted approach of both governments that have behaved like Raja Jaichand and Mir Jafar to ally with foreigners against their own flesh and blood has its roots in the Partition.

Britain offered the opportunity to keep India united by presenting the Cabinet Mission Plan that would have created a federation. Jinnah accepted the proposal. Nehru rejected it because the Plan allowed the Muslim dominated units to secede after 10 years if they so wished. Like pathetic colonial minions the leaders of India and Pakistan accepted Independence and Partition without the borders of the new nations determined. Immediately after Independence, accompanied by Partition, riots engineered by interested foreign powers to perpetuate the division cost a million lives within a few months. Similarly the engineered Kashmir dispute led to the partition of the state in order to create a permanent bone of contention that would prevent reunification.

Nehru, who had rejected the Cabinet Mission Plan and a confederation when these were offered, attempted before his death to undo the spirit of the Partition by creating an Indo-Pakistan confederation. In 1959 President Ayub Khan offered joint defence that would have automatically led to a confederation. But the same President Ayub Khan rejected Nehru’s proposal of a confederation presented by Sheikh Abdullah which Jinnah had accepted at the time of the Cabinet Mission Plan. In other words, both India and Pakistan had wanted confederation. But they had wanted it at different times. Therefore they cannot agree. Is this not shocking diplomacy? The absence of statesmanship displayed by leaders of both governments and their readiness to serve foreign interests could not be more glaring.

The latest revelations by the Indian government and General VK Singh have made prospects of reconciliation ever more remote. Peace will come only if the leaders of India and Pakistan are bold enough to cut the Gordian knot and make a dramatic breakthrough. Critics have opposed the proposed meeting between the Prime Ministers of India and Pakistan scheduled for September 29 in New York. BJP leader and former foreign minister Mr. Yashwant Sinha has stated that such a meeting is premature as long as terrorism continues. He suggested that lower officials should first meet. One begs to differ. Even if lower officials meet and people to people contacts continue for a hundred years there will be no progress.

The problem is the trust deficit. That exists between governments and not between peoples. That exists because the armies of both nations are in contention. Only joint defence and operations to wipe out terrorism from the region will remove the trust deficit. There are more victims of terrorism in Pakistan than in India. Prime Minister Mr. Manmohan Singh should bluntly tell Mr. Nawaz Sharif on September 29 that enough is enough. Unless the armies of both nations cooperate there cannot be peace and stability in the region. If even now, when both nations are besieged by terrorism and instability, their governments cannot act rationally, they never will. Without joint defence the trust deficit cannot be removed. If there is joint defence it must inevitably lead to some form of confederation. Both leaders should read the writing on the wall. They should forget what their critics might say today. They should focus on what historians will say tomorrow.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Politicians, Army, playing with fire! Sep

25

      1 Vote

General VK Singh reportedly has decided to file an application with the Right to Information (RTI) commission seeking a copy of General Vinod Bhatia’s secret report on the alleged misuse of the top secret Technical Support Division (TSD) during his tenure as Army Chief. Will the government respond by releasing the secret report? After news of the report appeared in the media the government stated that the report “impinges on matters of national security and, as such, the government will take a decision and further actions after careful examination.” If the contents of the report impinge on national security it is difficult to see how the government can agree to release the report.

However, then a further question is raised. If the report will not be released to the public how was it allowed to be leaked to the media? After the media exposure the government did not deny the report or displayed reticence but went out of its way to acknowledge its contents and resolved to probe the affair. One spokesperson of the Congress party blithely informed TV that since the media had obtained the report the matter had to be fully probed. But the government has not addressed the obvious question of how the media obtained the report. From all accounts it has not ordered an inquiry into who leaked the report and taken steps to punish the guilty. The circumstantial evidence of the government itself leaking the report is compelling. In the pursuit of petty partisan politics was the government oblivious of the grave implications that might flow from the leakage?

That is not all. Politicians further endangered the situation. BJP President Mr. Rajnath Singh defended General VK Singh and charged the UPA government with targeting him because he shared a platform with Mr. Narendra Modi. The Punjab Congress was quick to retaliate. Captain Amarinder Singh reiterated the allegation in the report that General VK Singh had misused TSD to attempt scuttling the appointment of the current Army Chief General Bikram Singh. He challenged Punjab Chief Minister Mr. Prakash Singh Badal to clarify his stand since he was supporting the BJP and Mr. Narendra Modi.

Have India ’s politicians gone stark raving mad? In the pursuit of their stupid and petty rivalries they are creating a situation that could encourage polarization between Hindu and Sikh, between Haryana and Punjab . Whatever the truth of real or imagined differences between army generals, these might be based upon entirely professional grounds. But in public perception the differences could most likely be seen as between communities and states. If such perception is allowed to grow, how will it affect all the ranks in the army?

The TSD unit was conceived and created after the 26/11 terrorist attack in Mumbai. The purpose of this top secret unit was to counter terrorism. Now not only the existence of this top secret unit is blown, but efforts are actually being made to reveal its operations and functioning in order to settle political scores. The most far reaching consequences of this sorry episode might well be General VK Singh rebuttal of the allegations against him publicized by the government. In an interview to Times Now TV channel he furnished damaging details of how the army has been operating in Jammu and Kashmir for the past many decades. His revelations make mockery of India ’s official stand on Kashmir.

One can imagine how gleefully members of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) in China and the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) in Pakistan would be with rapt attention watching the unfolding exposure of the functioning of India’s top secret army unit established to counter terrorism.

Share this:

1 Comment

Posted in Nation

Has Government committed treason? Sep

22

      2 Votes

Not surprisingly the controversy created by the media exposure and its subsequent official confirmation of the alleged misuse of the Technical Services Division (TSD) by former Army Chief General VK Singh is expected to snowball into a major national crisis. But the crisis may not evolve as those who leaked the information might imagine. According to The Indian Express that published the report General Singh had conveyed a warning that if they went ahead and published it “they will get it in the neck”. General Singh reportedly told the Press Trust of India (PTI) news agency that anyone recommending a probe into the functioning of TSD was being nonsensical because its operations were meant to be secret.

General Singh might have enlightened the public a little more. The mere fact that the inquiry into the functioning of TSD was “secret” suggests that the TSD operation was not only secret but probably “top secret”. If that is the case the consequences for the government as well as for media outlets utilized by the government could be very serious. In that event even the existence of TSD should never have been publicized. Further, if there is exposure of the actual working of the top secret unit, leaking information about it may well be considered treasonable under law, regardless of whether infromation is true or false. It involves national security. Such information can help the nation’s enemies. Even knowledge of the existence of TSD can help the nation’s enemies.

Did the government factor this aspect into its calculations before rushing to the media with its leaks? The last on this issue has not been heard. Events thus far may be in fact just the start of a crisis that could traumatize the system.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

President, army and governance! Sep

21

      1 Vote

According to media reports the Defence Ministry constituted a secret Board of Officers body headed by Lt General Vinod Bhatia to probe alleged irregularities committed during the tenure of former Army Chief General VK Singh. It is alleged that General Singh set up a controversial Military Intelligence unit, Technical Services Division (TSD) that misused secret funds to conduct unauthorized covert operations that interfered in domestic politics. According to reports General Bhatia has advised a fuller probe by an external agency like the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The report alleges that TDS misused secret funds in an effort to destabilize the Jammu and Kashmir government, as well as block the promotion of the present Army Chief General Bikram Singh. The media report has furnished details about how these irregularities were sought to be accomplished.

This report was played up as a first page banner in The Indian Express, and appeared as an unobtrusive single column in the inside pages of The Times of India. The Express claims that it tried unsuccessfully to contact General VK Singh but managed to interact through a mutual contact that quoted the General to say that the report was rubbish and the government was motivated by the fact that he had shared a public platform with opposition leader Mr. Narendra Modi. General Bhatia had submitted his report to the Defence Ministry in March this year. This is an amazing episode and offers glaring evidence of how deeply governance and responsibility to preserve national security have sunk. The following questions need to be addressed.

First, now that the report has been quoted in the media it has to be established whether the allegations leveled by General Bhatia’s team of officers are valid. If true it reveals a shocking state of affairs in which a serving Army Chief can so misuse his powers to further political ends unconnected to his call of duty. If untrue, it reveals an equally shocking state of affairs in which politics has infected the armed forces to allow such false and motivated allegations to be made in order to settle differences within the Defence Ministry. Secondly, the report was submitted in March. Why has it surfaced only now almost six months later after the Defence Minister reportedly has got into the act? Does this validate General Singh’s reported comment that he is being targeted only because he shared a public platform with Mr. Narendra Modi? Thirdly, if it be assumed that the report has substance surely there are various discreet methods of addressing the issue, of even indirectly punishing the guilty, and keep the controversy away from public attention?

Transparency in governance is an excellent principle and the media cannot be criticized for playing up the report when offered the chance. But does it behoove a government to throw all considerations of national security to the winds and jeopardize it by publicizing such an episode if indeed it occurred as alleged? What kind of government is ruling India , and what kind of priorities does it have?

Finally, one cannot but reflect once again whether there can ever be accountability in our collapsing democracy unless the President discharges the responsibilities assigned to his post by our Constitution. It is weeks since communal riots exposed the failure of law and order in Uttar Pradesh. Every single party spokesperson has demanded that the government be dismissed. Official spokespersons of the Congress have said that law and order has collapsed. Yet the central government remains a mute spectator although it claims that the rule of law has collapsed in the state. Neither the Prime Minister nor the President has taken a single tiny step to introduce Governor’s rule. The latest episode related to the TSD report has grave implications for the state of affairs in our armed forces as well as for national security. The President as the Supreme Commander of the armed forces is directly responsible to safeguard both. Will he still remain mute?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Modi’s poll campaign error! Sep

19

      Rate This

From all accounts Mr. Narendra Modi’s inaugural campaign rally in Rewari after being anointed Prime Ministerial candidate of the BJP was the largest ever seen in the district. In some of his earlier rallies also common people had flocked to his meetings with great enthusiasm. Obviously, in addition to the formidable publicity and mobilization organized by the RSS and powerful business interests supporting Mr. Modi, certain qualities of his persona too have caught the imagination of the masses. This has been seized by political analysts and his party’s leaders to describe Mr. Modi as the first great national Other Backward Classes (OBC) leader who might become Prime Minister. Media analysts may be forgiven for their ignorance of political ground realities to describe Mr. Modi as a national OBC leader. But surely the poll managers of the BJP ought to have known better?

It is a grievous flaw to describe Mr. Modi as a national OBC icon. Not only are BJP leaders assiduously promoting this image, even Mr. Modi himself seems to have become victim of this flawed propaganda. Mr. Modi belongs to the Ghanchi caste found only in the state of Gujarat . It is a sub-caste in the OBC category. People belonging to the Teli caste in other states may empathize with the Ghanchi caste because of a shared occupational history related to extraction of oil. Otherwise the Ghanchi caste will have little relevance outside Gujarat . Belonging to the Ghanchi caste makes Mr. Modi an OBC leader. It does not make him a national icon of OBC voters. There is no national OBC icon. There cannot be a national OBC icon. There can only be a national icon who is an OBC. The distinction should be appreciated.

The very logic of caste identity runs counter to a nationwide OBC identity. Caste mobilization becomes easy precisely because the approach is tribal. Caste leaders often unite to make common cause. That makes it easy and convenient for the big business corporate sector to use money power to split or align political forces to suit their interest. But when have castes en block voted for a leader belonging to another caste because of his OBC status? Why do not the Kurmis in Bihar vote for Mr. Laloo Yadav, or the Yadavs vote for Mr. Nitish Kumar? Before Mr. Modi became his party’s election campaign chief the BJP had already laid the ground for positive poll results in UP after Mr. Rajnath Singh brought back Mr. Kalyan Singh into his party’s fold. The revived Thakur-Kurmi alliance had earlier brought the BJP its largest ever parliamentry tally of 57 MPs. With Miss Uma Bharati entering UP politics, in addition to her oratory expected to consolidate the Hindutva vote bank, she will also undoubtedly attract Lodh voters belonging to her caste.

Yet media analysts and BJP poll managers are busy trying to exploit Mr. Modi’s OBC status to project him as the first great OBC national leader who might become Prime Minister. Unfortunately, Mr. Modi has bought this flawed approach. Celebrating his birthday recently in Gujarat Mr. Modi reached out and invited many OBC leaders of the organized and unorganized sectors to his function. National thinking has become so corrupted and distorted by the caste reservation policy and mobilization of quick vote banks that an obvious truth escaped media analysts as well as the poll campaign managers of the BJP. If enthusiastic masses have flocked to Mr. Modi’s rallies it is not because he is a national OBC icon. It is because people have recognized that Mr. Modi has risen from very humble origins like themselves to acquire a national political status. If the masses empathize with Mr. Modi it is not because he is an OBC but because he was poor and is now powerful.

The flawed approach adopted by Mr. Modi and the BJP regarding the importance of his OBC status can have very far reaching consequences. It will determine what kind of Indian will emerge tomorrow if Mr. Modi does become Prime Minister. On his birthday Mr. Modi invited OBC leaders belonging to the organized and unorganized sectors of labour. OBC leaders can mobilize votes. That is an understandably attractive attribute. But so can union leaders of organized and unorganized labour mobilize voters. Why could not Mr. Modi have focused on them instead? Does Mr. Modi seek an India of his dreams symbolized by his proposed Statue of Unity to consolidate on the prevalent national divisive culture based upon over 4000 contending castes battling for economic crumbs?

Or does he seek to create a new Indian with a national identity above caste and community ready to confront the 21st century world? Will he support caste-based reservation or economic criteria for job and educational reservation? Will he promote universal compulsory primary education to lift all castes from poverty? These are some questions that Mr. Modi and the leaders of the BJP need to ponder if they seek a genuine political change. They have to decide whether they want victory in the present or a victory for the future. Do they want to cater to India of the present or to India of the future that will belong to the young?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Modi’s proposed Statue of Unity! Sep

17

      1 Vote

Concluding his first public rally in Rewari after being anointed Prime Ministerial candidate of the BJP, Mr. Narendra Modi appealed to his audience to donate pieces of iron from each village in the state to be used for constructing his proposed Statue of Unity on the sea coast of Gujarat . Mr. Modi wants similar donations of iron pieces from each village in each state across the nation in honour of Sardar Vallabhai Patel who will symbolize unity in the proposed statue. Mr. Modi has declared his intention of constructing the tallest statue in the world, taller than America ’s Statue of Liberty, in honour of Sardar Patel.

This writer has serious objection to the proposal. Sardar Patel was undoubtedly a very great man, as were Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru. Patel performed great service to the nation by unifying the princely states of India after Independence . But though these great leaders did great things for the nation they also committed unforgivable errors the consequence of which continue to haunt our nation. These leaders, mainly Sardar Patel, united Bharat but they divided India . They divided India without the slightest justification. They divided India because they allowed themselves to be influenced and manipulated by the British.

With just over 1000 people killed in Punjab through communal riots engineered by the British administration immediately after Lord Mountbatten became India ’s Viceroy, and about 12000 killed in Bihar and Bengal over a period of two years, these leaders violated their solemn pledge to the people of India by accepting Partition. Gandhi on the fateful day, June 3, 1947 when the Congress formally accepted Partition, conveniently observed his ‘day of silence’. Nehru and Patel were the hawks in the Congress Working Committee in favour of accepting Partition. JB Kripalani, Jayaprakash Narain and Ram Manohar Lohia who opposed Partition were overruled by the rest. On June 2, on eve of the decision, Gandhi assured Mountbatten who visited him that he would not create any hurdles against the decision.

In what manner then might Sardar Patel symbolize unity? After two lawyers from Gujarat, Gandhi and Jinnah, and two aristocrats from Uttar Pradesh, Nehru and Liaquat Ali, butchered and cut asunder Punjab and Bengal displaying their ignorance about the ground realities in these states, people today should display some sensitivity towards the sentiments of provinces where over a million people were slaughtered and over ten million rendered homeless due to the follies of these leaders. In case critics challenge this view about the unforgivable decision about the Partition, let them note that both Gandhi and Nehru acknowledged their error. Gandhi wanted to settle down in Pakistan to undo the Partition just before he was assassinated thanks to ignored security measures during Sardar Patel’s tenure as Home Minister. Nehru sent Sheikh Abdullah to Pakistan to plead with President Ayub Khan to reunite India and Pakistan through a proposed confederation during which effort he died.

Therefore this writer would like to remind Mr. Narendra Modi and many others from different parts of India that they may have their history and may choose to honour whom they wish. The peoples of Punjab and Bengal have their own history and their own memories to recall. Congress leaders today may be the best in the land. They are welcome to govern India . But the Congress Party as Imperial Britain’s instrument to partition India deserves to be buried. Let Congress leaders reinvent themselves into a new organization. After all, this demand merely echoes the last wish of the most revered Congress icon, Mahatma Gandhi, on the day before he died.

Mr. Modi is welcome to construct his Statue of Unity. The people of Punjab and Bengal might seek their own way of responding to history. Human folly can delay but not derail history. Ultimately, cultural nationalism will triumph.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Profit & Loss of UP riots! Sep

14

      Rate This

All political parties and media outlets seem agreed that the recent Muzzafarnagar riots which cost 40 lives and brought untold misery to thousands who fled their homes, were the result of a conspiracy. But all seem to disagree about who was behind the conspiracy. The UP government was suspiciously lax in acting on warnings issued by the central government months earlier. Inexplicably it allowed a Jat mahapanchayat of 1.5 lakh people just 20 km from Muzaffarnagar in violation of prohibitory orders in force in the entire district due to prevailing tension. Thousands of vehicles and tractors from Haryana, Delhi and the neighbouring districts of UP were allowed to descend on the venue of the mahapanchayat. One UP minister has acknowledged that there was an administrative lapse. Samajwadi Party (SP) leader Mr. Mulayam Singh was at pains to stress that the riots were not communal but ethnic – between Jats and Muslims. Chief Minister Mr. Akhilesh Yadav has accused other political parties for the conspiracy.

The UP administration has charged that a five minute fake video was used to fan violence. One BJP leader has been arrested in connection with that video. The district administration of Muzafarnagar lodged criminal cases against a senior BJP leader and former minister along with three other BJP leaders for violating the prohibitory order and allegedly delivered provocative speeches during the Jat mahapanchayat. The BJP leaders have denied charges. Leaders of the Bharat Kisan Union (BKU) and the Congress were also charged on similar grounds. Allegations and counter allegations of conspiracy to instigate the riots flew thick and fast between the BJP, SP, Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) and Congress. However, it is futile to speculate who was behind the conspiracy. It is futile to speculate that if there was indeed a conspiracy, whether it was the work of individual politicians or was it sanctioned by their respective political organizations. What can be assessed with some accuracy is the political impact of riots. Which party gained, and which party lost?

The SP is a huge loser. It is likely to lose its Muslim vote which is vital for its electoral success. Had Muzzafarnagar limited itself to communal tension the SP would have gained. That explains the seemingly deliberate administrative dereliction of duty. The Muslims of West UP who supported Mr. Ajit Singh’s Rashtriya Lok DaL (RLD) might have been weaned away to support SP. But things got out of hand. The Jat mahapanchayat was followed by horrendous riots. The government’s failure has left the Muslim community bitter and alienated.

The BSP could be a gainer. The first Muslim priority as of present is to remove this government. In the assembly elections the BSP offers the best chance of doing it. Similarly the Congress could be a gainer. For parliamentary elections the Muslim vote will attempt to block the BJP. On present reckoning the Congress provides the only hope of accomplishing that.

The BJP is the biggest gainer. Notwithstanding Mr. Mulayam Singh’s nitpicking distinction between communal riots and ethnic riots, the accession of the Jat vote to the BJP, along with widespread communal polarization following the riots across the state, could provide a huge boost to BJP prospects.

The RLD is the biggest loser. The traditional harmony between Muslims and Jats carefully nurtured by the late Choudhary Charan Singh rendered West UP a solid base for the RLD. That harmony has been shattered. The cost of this division will be very heavy. It could destroy the dream of carving a new state of Harit Pradesh in West UP. Both the Jats and the Muslims yearned for it. The Muslims are one third of the population in the region. The Deoband centre of religious learning is in the region. The destruction of the fine balance between Jats and Muslims may be irreparable for a long time. Both communities may now repent at leisure.

It is in this cynical way that politicians will calculate the outcome of the Muzzafarnagar riots. They will not spare a thought for the heartrending tragedy befallen to innocent women and children. Their crime was that they belonged to a community. Their weakness was that they were poor. Their tragedy was that they lived in a country where politics is conducted by a cynical, cruel and corrupt class of leaders.

Share this:

1 Comment

Posted in Nation

Modified Modi! Sep

12

      2 Votes

According to media reports the BJP will formally anoint Mr. Narendra Modi as its Prime Ministerial candidate when the party’s parliamentary board meeting is held on Friday. Some time earlier the view had been expressed in these columns that there was no substantive difference between Prime Minister Mr. Manmohan Singh and Mr. Narendra Modi insofar as approach to economic policy was concerned. Both leaders seem to be focused mainly on quick growth based upon foreign investment and delivery of maximum facilities to the big corporate sector.

However, this writer deemed Mr. Modi superior because he was described as a “muscular” version of the Prime Minister. In Gujarat he offered quicker and smoother delivery to big business than the Prime Minister could at the centre. The reason was simple. There was no extra constitutional authority to derail and slow down Mr. Modi in Gujarat as the office of the National Advisory Council did to the Prime Minister in Delhi . The Prime Minister was helpless. He was appointed by Mrs. Sonia Gandhi and had to function under her direction. It was thought that Mr. Modi would have no such fetters to implement the economic model in which the Prime Minister reposed his faith. That view it seems was too hasty. Mr. Modi may in fact be no more muscular than the Prime Minister.

Recent events should leave no doubt that if Mr. Modi is declared as the BJP’s Prime Ministerial candidate it will be only due to the pressure exerted by the RSS on the party. The RSS has appointed Mr. Modi as the party’s Prime Ministerial candidate and left it to the party to announce the decision. Mr. Modi cannot be unaware of the crucial RSS support needed for his elevation. The support reportedly was promised after extended parleys and eventually the decision was taken after agreement was reached on the minimum demands conveyed by the RSS. According to media reports the four conditions set by the RSS for Mr. Modi to receive support were to pledge building a grand Ram Temple in Ayodhya, to enforce the contentious Uniform Civil Code across the country, to repeal of Article 370 in J&K and end the special status of the state, and to press for full protection of cows. All four conditions reflect policies of traditional Hindutva.

However, the merits or otherwise of the policies insisted upon by the RSS are not important. What is significant is that the RSS is insistent upon the implementation of its agenda. Like Mrs. Sonia Gandhi choosing Mr. Manmohan Singh as Prime Minister, the RSS has chosen Mr. Modi as its candidate. But unlike Mrs. Gandhi who established her National Advisory Council to offer policy directives to the government after Mr. Manmohan Singh assumed office, Mr. Mohan Bhagwat has not wasted time. He has already laid down the minimum policy agenda. This is just the start.

Many more policy directives should be expected if Mr. Modi does indeed become Prime Minister. Although Mr. Modi therefore may not prove to be a more muscular version of Mr. Manmohan Singh, constrained as he will be by an extra constitutional body, Mr. Mohan Bhagwat certainly is showing signs of being a much more muscular version of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi. This aspect needs to be considered carefully by all the supporters of Mr. Modi. It should be amply clear that apart from support by members of the public Mr. Modi is heavily backed by the most powerful big business corporate sector. Apart from Mr. Modi’s own undoubted attributes, his popularity depends heavily on the massive support rendered to him by the big business electronic media. There is nothing surprising about that. Big business will protect its own interests. But a serious question arises.

Many supporters of Mr. Modi draw comfort from the fact that he has not personally referred to any of the pro-Hindu policies associated with the hardcore Hindutva elements of the RSS. These supporters are being delusional. They betray their ignorance about how politics is played out. The approval of every action and every statement by any of the sources in the BJP will devolve on Mr. Modi as the election campaign in charge. His silence is meaningless. Silence will be taken as assent. If Mr. Modi disapproves of any policy or statement by members of his party he will have to contradict them publicly to record his dissent. Voters are influenced by whole parties and not by their perception of any one individual, however powerful or charismatic.

What should be clear therefore to all supporters of Mr. Modi, especially the powerful big business elements, is that the RSS agenda must be factored in their calculations. This is because Mr. Modi and RSS will be inseparable if he becomes the Prime Minister. There will be nothing wrong with that if Mr. Modi and the RSS see eye to eye on all policy matters. If on the other hand Mr. Modi’s personal predilection is at variance from the RSS, there could be a very serious problem. In that event Mr. Modi’s government could become as paralyzed as Mr. Manmohan Singh’s government. There would be precisely the same kind of diarchy in governance as paralyzed the UPA government. The paralysis in the UPA government became so palpable that even Congress General Secretary Mr. Digvijay Singh was constrained to acknowledge publicly that the existing system of diarchy was undesirable.

The powerful vested interests favouring Mr. Modi should therefore carefully scrutinize the total RSS agenda in order to continue their support. This applies to all the international big business executives who descended from Europe and South America to endorse Mr. Modi, to all the young Indians who seek a modern twenty-first century nation and look up to Mr. Modi, to all the biggest business houses in the nation who are solidly backing Mr. Modi, and to all the mainstream media TV anchors who swoon with excitement each time Mr. Modi sneezes. It is entirely possible of course that the RSS policies may exceed their wildest dreams of promoting economic growth and progress in India . But that is a prospect it would be more prudent for them to assess now instead of later. What needs to be understood is that either Mr. Modi is totally supportive of RSS policies, or if he is not, there are prospects once again of paralyzing diarchy that could ruin governance in India.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Post navigation← Older posts

Media’s response to Pak Envoy! Oct

9

      1 Vote

During a press interview to a foreign journalist President Pranab Mukherjee said that even if cross border terrorism was perpetrated by non-state actors as Islamabad claimed, the Pakistan government could not evade responsibility. The territory was under the jurisdiction of the government, the President pointed out. “Non-state actors do not descend from heaven,

” he said. This view was echoed by Information and Broadcasting (I&B) Minister Mr. Manish Tewari who told media that the crossing over by terrorists and non-state actors suggested either complicity or negligence by the Pakistan government. “Obviously these terrorists or non-state actors are not coming out of a vacuum,”

he said.

The Pakistan High Commissioner to India Mr. Salman Bashir gave a veiled rejoinder to these remarks. But he focused his criticism mainly against the media. He accused the media of focusing exclusively on “so-called” incursions and infiltrations from across the border.

He said:

“Whoever is making the argument that they have not descended from heaven, I want to ask who are these thousands of people who are involved in heinous acts of terrorism in Pakistan . Have they descended from heaven? We agree they have not descended from heaven, from where are they being funded and sourced?”

One can appreciate the constraints under which Pakistan ’s official envoy to India has to function. Mr. Bashir said something, and he implied something. Both his assertion and implication deserve attention. Since he thought it fit to direct his ire against the Indian media this writer takes the liberty of directly responding to his criticism.

Mr. Bashir cannot blame the Indian media of responding to continued incursions from across the border which for diplomatic compulsions he described as “so-called”. But he was right to point out the failure of the Indian government as well as the media to adequately differentiate between the government and non-state actors in Pakistan . Mr. Bashir has rightly asserted that “thousands of terrorists” are operating against Pakistan who obviously did not descend from heaven. By implication this is tacit admission of failure of the Pakistan government. It is a fact that there are substantially more victims of terrorism in Pakistan than in India including in the state of J&K. Then Mr. Bashir went on to question the source of funding and training of these terrorists. His central plea was for the enhancement of cooperation between Islamabad and New Delhi.

He said:

“We have evidence which we have shared and are prepared to share with the rest of the world and particularly with the government of India on fuelling of acts of terrorism in Pakistan .”

Mr. Bashir’s plea for greater cooperation between India and Pakistan to fight terror clearly indicates that by questioning the source of terror funding he was not pointing a finger at India . He was obviously indicating the hand of Al Qaeda which inspires global terrorism. In the light of the reality of terrorist activity in Pakistan funded and directed by global forces the Indian government is clearly remiss in not taking an initiative for closer cooperation with Pakistan to combat terror. New Delhi ’s inhibition may be explained by its continued doubts about how deeply subverted Pakistan ’s security establishment is by pro-terror elements. Well, the Indian media has no such inhibitions. Since Mr. Bashir squarely blamed the Indian media I take the liberty of directly addressing him. I put a question to the Pakistan government through him that the Indian government has failed to do.

Mr. Bashir you seek closer cooperation between India and Pakistan , you admit that there are thousands of terrorists operating inside Pakistan . You indicate that they are funded and directed from abroad. You tacitly imply though you do not state that they cannot operate without help from a section of the official machinery. I agree with your overall analysis. My question is: Will the Pakistan government accept an offer of joint intelligence and joint operations against terror to wipe out these non-state actors from both our countries?

I know that you may not deign to respond to such a question from a mere media person instead of from the government. But let me assure you. If you do answer the media will compel the Indian government to respond appropriately.

So will you respond?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

The President’s curious priorities! Oct

8

      1 Vote

After the media pointed out that the credit for the rollback of the Ordinance on convicted MPs went to President Pranab Mukherjee and not to Congress Vice-President Rahul Gandhi who exploited the President’s known reluctance to sign it, Mr. LK Advani praised the President for his decision. However, the President reacted to this praise most curiously. The President with uncalled for modesty went out of his way to dissociate himself from the decision to roll back the Ordinance. It is known that he sat over the Ordinance and was reluctant to sign it. By signing it he could have possibly attracted strictures from the Supreme Court to make his position untenable. Understandably he mulled over the matter and shared his views with UPA Ministers who called on him to discuss the Ordinance. It was after that when Mr. Rahul Gandhi jumped into the controversy to corner credit. Mr. Advani’s praise for the President therefore was a routine and unexceptionable observation.

However the President reacted to the media in response to such praise by saying:

“I cannot comment on what the Opposition has said about my role. My duties are now completely determined by the Indian Constitution.”

The praise for the President was precisely because he did follow the Constitution by not immediately signing the Ordinance. Why, then, his curiously defensive rejoinder? Eyebrows were further raised after the President’s son, Mr. Abhijeet Mukherjee, called on the chief victim of the scrapped Ordinance, Mr. Lalu Prasad Yadav, who was in jail. The popular conclusion derived from this visit was that Mr. Mukherjee had gone there to convince Mr. Yadav that the decision not to sign the Ordinance reflected no personal motive of the President but was dictated by the Constitution. This was unnecessary. Mr. Yadav one is sure is sufficiently knowledgeable to have been aware of that. If such speculation has any basis it is certainly odd that the President should be so concerned about Mr. Yadav’s feelings. The President after all is above party politics.

Alas, it does not seem that the President is as much above party politics as he should be. His continued silence over the horrendous events in Andhra is equally mystifying. After the Union government hastily declared the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh by ceding the new state of Telangana despite the state assembly being overwhelmingly opposed to the measure, the entire state is in flames. Apart from mammoth public protest and indefinite fasts launched by politicians, the whole state is without electric power because of a strike by workers. And this situation has been growing and worsening for days. Has not the Constitutional machinery in the state collapsed to necessitate the application of Article 356 to impose President’s rule in Andhra to restore order? But the Prime Minister and the Union cabinet are mute.

Surprisingly, even the President is silent. Article 78 (b) of the Constitution states: “It shall be the duty of the Prime Minister to furnish such information relating to the administration of the affairs of the Union and proposals for legislation as the President may call for.” Should not the President invoke this Article and initiate action? Surely the millions of agitated people in Andhra Pradesh deserve as much attention as Mr. Lalu Yadav should get?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Snooping, security and privacy! Oct

5

      1 Vote

After Julian Assange and the Wikileaks controversy it is the Edgar Snowden affair that has rocked the world. Snowden was a government contractor working at the National Security Agency (NSA) in America. The NSA in order to protect the US snoops on citizens in America and abroad looking for terrorist connections. The NSA collects and analyses foreign communication and foreign signals of intelligence in order to protect the US. In an interview in Hong Kong Snowden leaked top-secret government surveillance programs that led to an international debate over national security versus individual privacy. In a recent statement to the European Parliament Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Snowden said:

“A culture of secrecy has denied our societies the opportunity to determine the appropriate balance between the human right of privacy and the governmental interest in investigation.”

Among Snowden’s leaks was information about secret US surveillance of foreign governments including Brazil and India. The Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff in protest lashed out at the US in the UN General Assembly and canceled her official visit to Washington. Critics in India not only criticized the US but berated the Indian government after disclosures that it had also like America and China snooped on citizens.

Whatever the extent of public outrage over official snooping, it will not and cannot stop. The world needs a reality check. As long as terrorism survives in the world and weapons of mass destruction can be manufactured by private citizens in a garage, surveillance is a survival imperative for governments. What is required is that such surveillance by all governments be monitored and controlled by the UN.

Technology has not only enabled private citizens to manufacture weapons of mass destruction, but also to snoop on governments and citizens alike. In the foreseeable future therefore privacy cannot be guaranteed for any citizen or government. In the event is it not prudent for people to adjust to the new reality? In other words technology will render total transparency for governments and private citizens unavoidable. It will signify a game changing new culture for mankind. Should not people therefore start adjusting to this change and make their lives totally transparent? It may lead to a happier and safer world.

Indeed, there could well be advantages in being snooped upon! While many people criticize the government’s snooping policy, so do I but for different reasons. My complaint is that the government does not bug my telephone, hack my computer or bug my regular haunts where I have coffee sessions with friends. I want to be heard but nobody listens. Does the government think that it is only the rich and the powerful that can provide useful information?

So can ordinary people like this writer. The government should bug ordinary people too in order to create a level playing field. Not only Neera Radia and Amar Singh are worth snooping on. People like me too have valuable ideas that would help the government. Alas! All my ideas and the pearls of wisdom exchanged with friends go waste because the government does not snoop on me. If the government were to do so would not some of that wisdom penetrate the dense minds of our rulers to improve governance and conditions in our nation?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Politics of convicted MPs! Oct

3

      1 Vote

The current controversy over the Supreme Court (SC) judgment and the government’s Ordinance on the continuance of convicted MPs in legislatures needs to be appreciated in its proper perspective. Right now corruption is a very emotive issue. The public not surprisingly has jumped to the conclusion that the Ordinance which sought to overrule the SC judgment was part of political chicanery. But to what extent does the SC judgment or for that matter the Ordinance actually affect the prevalence of corruption in the system? Is everybody in the government, parliament and judiciary missing the wood for the trees?

The existing Representation of Peoples (RP) Act was challenged by two writ petitions filed by advocate Lily Thomas and Lok Prahari, through its General Secretary S. N. Shukla. The petitioners questioned the legality of MPs continuing in parliament despite conviction by obtaining a stay order and further hearing from a higher court. The SC considered the RP Act unconstitutional and ruled that immediately after conviction the MP with a sentence of two or more years.must be disqualified. The Union cabinet drafted an ordinance to neutralize the Supreme Court’s order mandating immediate disqualification. The government held that if the conviction was stayed by the higher court within 90 days the elected representative should not be disqualified. But the government in its ordinance denied the convicted MP perks and voting rights till being cleared by a higher court. Only, the MP’s seat would remain occupied and there would be no by-election.

Recognizing ground realities the government considered the ease with which motivated and fraudulent prosecution and conviction could be secured from lower courts to harm even innocent politicians. Law Minister Kapil Sibal said that “everybody knows the judicial system has miserably failed to save itself from corruption charges and nepotism”. Even though the Ordinance remedy may be flawed the truth of judicial corruption cannot be denied and has indeed been voiced by Supreme Court judges and reputed jurists.

The media has gone to town attributing Rahul Gandhi’s outburst against the Ordinance as the trigger to clean up the system and check corruption and criminalization. The reality is of course that it was the President’s doubts about the legality of the Ordinance conveyed to cabinet ministers that was seized by the Congress party to enact Rahul Gandhi’s drama in order to obtain credit. The entire issue is being projected by the media and perhaps being swallowed by the public as a great fight against corruption launched by the Congress inspired by Rahul Gandhi. This is laughable. The politicians, the judiciary and the media are living in world of make believe. Consider the reality.

Two MPs, Lalu Yadav and Rashid Masood have been unseated in parliament after being convicted in corruption cases. Their corruption was committed decades ago. Lalu Yadav has been convicted after 17 years and Masood has been convicted after 23 years of their misdemeanors. Even if neither was a sitting MP both would have enjoyed three of four terms of being in parliament before this recent conviction. What kind of fight against corruption and cleansing of parliament is that? Currently there would be a dozen leading MPs involved in corruption during the Commonwealth Games and other mega scams under investigation and facing court proceedings. Will they be unseated after remaining in parliament for the next several terms and being convicted after a few decades?

The prime need is to make mandatory the completion of all court cases within six months so that speedy justice can punish the guilty. That calls for serious judicial reform. Instead of addressing that the obsession with legal nitpicking related to the RP Act through Supreme Court rulings and government Ordinances is meaningless and irrelevant. It is designed only to deceive the public into believing that corruption is genuinely being fought.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

PM’s US trip succeeds despite sabotage! Oct

1

      1 Vote

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to America has been as successful as could be reasonably expected. It was a crucial trip during which the PM met President Obama, Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and heads of other SAARC nations. In his meeting with President Obama a game changing breakthrough was achieved not sufficiently appreciated by analysts. America and India have agreed to become closest partners for defence cooperation. For transfer of defence technology India ’s relations with the US are now at par with Britain.

This is what Pandit Nehru sought from President Kennedy after the Sino-Indian conflict of 1962 when the latter’s death aborted the effort. This is what President Bush sought when he signed the nuclear deal but that effort failed because the Indian government scared of domestic criticism failed to deliver. Now agreement has been reached. The first sign of change is evident from India ’s consent to participate in joint naval exercises in the world’s largest maritime exercise involving dozens of countries. China is not invited to the exercise and the People’s Liberation Army has expressed strong opposition to it. Regardless of the PM’s future the Indo-US deal has been signed. It is likely to endure because it is not between political parties but between governments.

The PM’s meeting with his Pakistani counterpart was as crucial. Though no breakthrough was achieved or attempted the ice was broken. Contrary to the expectations of sceptics the PM addressed India ’s immediate concerns about border violations and terror camps. Mr. Sharif did acknowledge those concerns and promised action to stabilize the border. After he delivers some results the PMs will meet to carry the dialogue further. Already undated invitations for such meeting have been extended. If the PM achieved a big step forward towards the US , he also managed a baby half-step towards Pakistan . Now it remains to be seen how the agreements of this visit actually translate into results.

Anyone following the run-up to the Prime Minister’s visit would marvel at the number of glitches that suddenly erupted to mar its prospects. And for each manufactured event to scuttle progress in the talks the media played its part by a hysterical negative approach to the visit. The opposition parties by their strident criticism of the PM while he was abroad, throwing all accepted diplomatic norms to the winds, also played its part. It is a well established norm that opposition parties do not attack a head of state when he is abroad or when opposition leaders themselves are abroad. This is what democratic bipartisan approach to foreign policy denotes. But the BJP launched a shrill attack against the PM demanding an explanation while he was in the US.

The rot started with Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi. He enacted a preplanned unprecedented theatrical performance to rubbish the PM just hours before he was scheduled to meet President Obama. This demeaned the PM in the eyes of the opposition and demands for his resignation were voiced. It is a reflection of our sick state of politics that even the PM’s former press Advisor Mr. Sanjay Baru was swept along the popular current to advise the PM to resign. It is amazing that not a single voice within or outside the Congress party has made the obvious democratic demand. After the intemperate, ill-timed and irresponsible statement by the ruling party’s vice-president to damage prospects of international negotiations, it is Rahul Gandhi who should be sacked from his post if he does not voluntarily resign.

Why should the PM be asked to quit?

Narendra Modi in a public rally in Delhi lashed out at Gandhi. But he was equally amiss himself. In his speech he sought to damage the PM’s foreign visit by uttering two falsehoods. The first was that the PM had allegedly lamented to Obama that India was a very poor nation in need of help. From where did Modi get his information?

From all accounts the PM discussed terrorism and not India ’s poverty. The second falsehood was even more intriguing. Based upon a TV quote by a noted Pakistani journalist Modi attempted to further muddy the atmosphere just hours before the PM and Nawaz Sharif were to meet. He quoted Pakistani anchor of Geo TV, Hamid Mir, who alleged on TV that Nawaz Sharif had described the PM as a “village woman” pleading before the US President. This was supposed to be said over a breakfast interview given by Sharif to two other journalists and Mir. The two other journalists, Barkha Dutt and a Pakistani journalist Absar Alam, both denied Mir’s version. It seemed that Sharif said that concerns against Pakistan could be addressed directly to Islamabad instead of to Washington.

This was in line with India ’s consistent stand contrary to Pakistan ’s earlier approach that Indo-Pak ties should be bilateral without third party intervention. After Barkha Dutt and Absar Alam rubbished Mir’s claims the latter confessed that Sharif made no criticism of the PM. He lamely tried to explain away his contradicted version by saying that Sharif spoke in jest. But why did not Mir say this in his original comment on TV? In that remark he even indicated that Sharif considered Manmohan Singh weak and was looking forward to doing business with his successor after 2014.

One will not speculate whether all this happened by coincidence or by design, and if by design, the inspiration of these incidents. Hamid Mir is a powerful and influential TV journalist in Pakistan. Currently there are differences between the Pakistan army and the civil government over how to tackle the Taliban. Nawaz Sharif is seeking a dialogue. The army wants to continue with the status quo by “fighting” the Taliban. Mir sympathized with the army by stating:

“It’s a very complicated situation. The army does not seem to be in the mood for talks as it has gained a lot of ground against the Taliban in the recent past.”

Mir should know. He has after all excellent contacts. He was in fact the last journalist to interview slain Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin laden in Afghanistan in 2002. It is difficult to believe that he could have accomplished this without the clearance, if not cooperation, of the ISI.

In summation, Rahul Gandhi, Narendra Modi and Hamid Mir all passed comments that could have damaged the PM’s US visit. Large sections of big business electronic media and the opposition joined them. Modi and Gandhi are repeatedly projected by the media as the two contenders for becoming prime minister. It is ironic that both contenders are on the same side insofar as the PM’s negotiations in the US were concerned. It is also intriguing that these three fed on each other’s narrative to rubbish the PM. But then, this does not necessarily suggest collusion. It could be pure coincidence. As for big business that funds both media and politics it may matter little which contender becomes PM. Heads I win, tails you lose!

For big business Modi and Gandhi might well be two sides of the same coin. But beyond business interests of the corporate sector there are also powerful international forces interested in damaging relations between India and the US , as well as between India and Pakistan . Now which international forces would be pleased if Indo-US and Indo-Pak elations deteriorated? It is for readers to ponder and arrive at their own conclusions.

Image (c) ibnlive.in.com

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

The great Congress mystery! Sep

30

      4 Votes

There is a mystery related to the functioning of the Congress party that nobody I have asked has been able to clear. The latest episode heightens the mystery. The Union cabinet along with the core group of the Congress party in the presence and with the consent of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi approved the draft of the Ordinance to protect criminal MPs. After the Ordinance was presented to the President he expressed doubts about its legality and delayed signing it. Meanwhile the opposition mounted a blistering attack against the Ordinance. Cabinet ministers and Congress party leaders stoutly defended the Ordinance and accused the opposition of being complicit in the decision to draft the Bill protecting criminal MPs.

Then Congress Vice President Mr. Rahul Gandhi without notice intervened in a Congress press conference and condemned the Ordinance in very strong and intemperate language. He did this while the PM was abroad about to hold very crucial meetings with several heads of states. The timing of Mr. Gandhi’s remarks was so significant that had he not been a leader of such limited understanding one might have concluded that he was representing a hostile foreign power seeking to damage India ’s foreign policy.

After Mr. Gandhi spoke the cabinet ministers and Congress party leaders instead of criticizing his performance somersaulted and fell in line making nonsense of their own earlier publicly stated remarks. This writer has never in his long career seen such a craven display of sycophancy and lack of self respect and honour as long as can be remembered.

Here then is the mystery. What is the secret of Mrs. Gandhi’s hold on all members of the Congress party? She cannot get votes. Her party is performing badly even in her own constituency despite campaigning by her and her family members. She has been accused by credible international sources of receiving illegal funds from foreign sources. She has been accused by credible international sources of having a secret illegal foreign bank account. She has never taken the trouble to deny charges. She has not displayed any significant expertise related to economic, foreign or political policy. Her son, Mr. Rahul Gandhi, is even less accomplished than her. There are serious and credible allegations of his having been detained in the US possessing unaccounted money and drugs and subsequently being released through intervention of the Indian government.

Despite all this, Congress party members from top to bottom behave like craven slaves of mother and son. One cannot fathom the reason for this. One would like to be enlightened. In conclusion this writer would like to clarify that he is not critical mainly of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi or Mr. Rahul Gandhi. They look after their interests as all people are expected to. It is the members of the Congress party that attract the strongest possible criticism. So obnoxious and counter productive is their conduct that it strengthens this writer’s belief that the Congress party must be buried in order to preserve Indian democracy.

Share this:

5 Comments

Posted in Nation

Kashmir exposures Convert crisis into opportunity! Sep

27

      1 Vote

Government should not overspend effort to undo the political damage inflicted by the recent leaked allegations by the Ministry of Defence and General VK Singh. The damage to India’s case in Kashmir cannot be undone. Just days after the recent disclosure terrorists have struck in Jammu to kill army and police personnel. More attacks should be expected by terrorists emboldened by the disclosures vindicating their allegations. Politics is about perception of facts and not about facts themselves. The recent disclosures have confirmed in the public mind all the perceived truths about India’s relationship with Kashmir repeatedly articulated by separatists and many other foreign powers. The government should instead seize the moment to convert a setback into opportunity and settle once and for all the Kashmir dispute that has bedeviled the subcontinent’s peace since Independence.

However, in order to attempt that the government must be honest enough to confront the truth and bold enough to dare an initiative.

What is the truth?

One need no iterate the oft repeated facts relating to the Kashmir dispute. Kashmir is not the problem but the symptom of the problem. The problem is the Partition. Kashmir was a state with contiguous borders with both India and Pakistan. The Hindu ruler of this Muslim majority state wanted independence and good relations with both nations. The attack by Pakistani raiders backed by its army to forcibly seize Kashmir forced the ruler’s hands. He acceded to India in order to obtain the Indian army’s help to repulse the enemy.

As Kashmir Chief Minister Mr. Omar Abdullah pointed out recently, Kashmir unlike other princely states of the Indian Union did not merge with India but stopped short after accession. That is why it has a special status and Article 370. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru at the time of accepting Kashmir’s instrument of accession stated that it was “subject to the will of the people of Kashmir”. This was followed by India’s acceptance of the UN Resolution regarding Plebiscite in Kashmir. For over six decades stupid policies pursued by the governments of India and Pakistan, both acting like foreign pawns, has denied the region peace and stability. The distorted approach of both governments that have behaved like Raja Jaichand and Mir Jafar to ally with foreigners against their own flesh and blood has its roots in the Partition.

Britain offered the opportunity to keep India united by presenting the Cabinet Mission Plan that would have created a federation. Jinnah accepted the proposal. Nehru rejected it because the Plan allowed the Muslim dominated units to secede after 10 years if they so wished. Like pathetic colonial minions the leaders of India and Pakistan accepted Independence and Partition without the borders of the new nations determined. Immediately after Independence, accompanied by Partition, riots engineered by interested foreign powers to perpetuate the division cost a million lives within a few months. Similarly the engineered Kashmir dispute led to the partition of the state in order to create a permanent bone of contention that would prevent reunification.

Nehru, who had rejected the Cabinet Mission Plan and a confederation when these were offered, attempted before his death to undo the spirit of the Partition by creating an Indo-Pakistan confederation. In 1959 President Ayub Khan offered joint defence that would have automatically led to a confederation. But the same President Ayub Khan rejected Nehru’s proposal of a confederation presented by Sheikh Abdullah which Jinnah had accepted at the time of the Cabinet Mission Plan. In other words, both India and Pakistan had wanted confederation. But they had wanted it at different times. Therefore they cannot agree. Is this not shocking diplomacy? The absence of statesmanship displayed by leaders of both governments and their readiness to serve foreign interests could not be more glaring.

The latest revelations by the Indian government and General VK Singh have made prospects of reconciliation ever more remote. Peace will come only if the leaders of India and Pakistan are bold enough to cut the Gordian knot and make a dramatic breakthrough. Critics have opposed the proposed meeting between the Prime Ministers of India and Pakistan scheduled for September 29 in New York. BJP leader and former foreign minister Mr. Yashwant Sinha has stated that such a meeting is premature as long as terrorism continues. He suggested that lower officials should first meet. One begs to differ. Even if lower officials meet and people to people contacts continue for a hundred years there will be no progress.

The problem is the trust deficit. That exists between governments and not between peoples. That exists because the armies of both nations are in contention. Only joint defence and operations to wipe out terrorism from the region will remove the trust deficit. There are more victims of terrorism in Pakistan than in India. Prime Minister Mr. Manmohan Singh should bluntly tell Mr. Nawaz Sharif on September 29 that enough is enough. Unless the armies of both nations cooperate there cannot be peace and stability in the region. If even now, when both nations are besieged by terrorism and instability, their governments cannot act rationally, they never will. Without joint defence the trust deficit cannot be removed. If there is joint defence it must inevitably lead to some form of confederation. Both leaders should read the writing on the wall. They should forget what their critics might say today. They should focus on what historians will say tomorrow.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Politicians, Army, playing with fire! Sep

25

      1 Vote

General VK Singh reportedly has decided to file an application with the Right to Information (RTI) commission seeking a copy of General Vinod Bhatia’s secret report on the alleged misuse of the top secret Technical Support Division (TSD) during his tenure as Army Chief. Will the government respond by releasing the secret report? After news of the report appeared in the media the government stated that the report “impinges on matters of national security and, as such, the government will take a decision and further actions after careful examination.” If the contents of the report impinge on national security it is difficult to see how the government can agree to release the report.

However, then a further question is raised. If the report will not be released to the public how was it allowed to be leaked to the media? After the media exposure the government did not deny the report or displayed reticence but went out of its way to acknowledge its contents and resolved to probe the affair. One spokesperson of the Congress party blithely informed TV that since the media had obtained the report the matter had to be fully probed. But the government has not addressed the obvious question of how the media obtained the report. From all accounts it has not ordered an inquiry into who leaked the report and taken steps to punish the guilty. The circumstantial evidence of the government itself leaking the report is compelling. In the pursuit of petty partisan politics was the government oblivious of the grave implications that might flow from the leakage?

That is not all. Politicians further endangered the situation. BJP President Mr. Rajnath Singh defended General VK Singh and charged the UPA government with targeting him because he shared a platform with Mr. Narendra Modi. The Punjab Congress was quick to retaliate. Captain Amarinder Singh reiterated the allegation in the report that General VK Singh had misused TSD to attempt scuttling the appointment of the current Army Chief General Bikram Singh. He challenged Punjab Chief Minister Mr. Prakash Singh Badal to clarify his stand since he was supporting the BJP and Mr. Narendra Modi.

Have India ’s politicians gone stark raving mad? In the pursuit of their stupid and petty rivalries they are creating a situation that could encourage polarization between Hindu and Sikh, between Haryana and Punjab . Whatever the truth of real or imagined differences between army generals, these might be based upon entirely professional grounds. But in public perception the differences could most likely be seen as between communities and states. If such perception is allowed to grow, how will it affect all the ranks in the army?

The TSD unit was conceived and created after the 26/11 terrorist attack in Mumbai. The purpose of this top secret unit was to counter terrorism. Now not only the existence of this top secret unit is blown, but efforts are actually being made to reveal its operations and functioning in order to settle political scores. The most far reaching consequences of this sorry episode might well be General VK Singh rebuttal of the allegations against him publicized by the government. In an interview to Times Now TV channel he furnished damaging details of how the army has been operating in Jammu and Kashmir for the past many decades. His revelations make mockery of India ’s official stand on Kashmir.

One can imagine how gleefully members of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) in China and the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) in Pakistan would be with rapt attention watching the unfolding exposure of the functioning of India’s top secret army unit established to counter terrorism.

Share this:

1 Comment

Posted in Nation

Has Government committed treason? Sep

22

      2 Votes

Not surprisingly the controversy created by the media exposure and its subsequent official confirmation of the alleged misuse of the Technical Services Division (TSD) by former Army Chief General VK Singh is expected to snowball into a major national crisis. But the crisis may not evolve as those who leaked the information might imagine. According to The Indian Express that published the report General Singh had conveyed a warning that if they went ahead and published it “they will get it in the neck”. General Singh reportedly told the Press Trust of India (PTI) news agency that anyone recommending a probe into the functioning of TSD was being nonsensical because its operations were meant to be secret.

General Singh might have enlightened the public a little more. The mere fact that the inquiry into the functioning of TSD was “secret” suggests that the TSD operation was not only secret but probably “top secret”. If that is the case the consequences for the government as well as for media outlets utilized by the government could be very serious. In that event even the existence of TSD should never have been publicized. Further, if there is exposure of the actual working of the top secret unit, leaking information about it may well be considered treasonable under law, regardless of whether infromation is true or false. It involves national security. Such information can help the nation’s enemies. Even knowledge of the existence of TSD can help the nation’s enemies.

Did the government factor this aspect into its calculations before rushing to the media with its leaks? The last on this issue has not been heard. Events thus far may be in fact just the start of a crisis that could traumatize the system.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

President, army and governance! Sep

21

      1 Vote

According to media reports the Defence Ministry constituted a secret Board of Officers body headed by Lt General Vinod Bhatia to probe alleged irregularities committed during the tenure of former Army Chief General VK Singh. It is alleged that General Singh set up a controversial Military Intelligence unit, Technical Services Division (TSD) that misused secret funds to conduct unauthorized covert operations that interfered in domestic politics. According to reports General Bhatia has advised a fuller probe by an external agency like the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The report alleges that TDS misused secret funds in an effort to destabilize the Jammu and Kashmir government, as well as block the promotion of the present Army Chief General Bikram Singh. The media report has furnished details about how these irregularities were sought to be accomplished.

This report was played up as a first page banner in The Indian Express, and appeared as an unobtrusive single column in the inside pages of The Times of India. The Express claims that it tried unsuccessfully to contact General VK Singh but managed to interact through a mutual contact that quoted the General to say that the report was rubbish and the government was motivated by the fact that he had shared a public platform with opposition leader Mr. Narendra Modi. General Bhatia had submitted his report to the Defence Ministry in March this year. This is an amazing episode and offers glaring evidence of how deeply governance and responsibility to preserve national security have sunk. The following questions need to be addressed.

First, now that the report has been quoted in the media it has to be established whether the allegations leveled by General Bhatia’s team of officers are valid. If true it reveals a shocking state of affairs in which a serving Army Chief can so misuse his powers to further political ends unconnected to his call of duty. If untrue, it reveals an equally shocking state of affairs in which politics has infected the armed forces to allow such false and motivated allegations to be made in order to settle differences within the Defence Ministry. Secondly, the report was submitted in March. Why has it surfaced only now almost six months later after the Defence Minister reportedly has got into the act? Does this validate General Singh’s reported comment that he is being targeted only because he shared a public platform with Mr. Narendra Modi? Thirdly, if it be assumed that the report has substance surely there are various discreet methods of addressing the issue, of even indirectly punishing the guilty, and keep the controversy away from public attention?

Transparency in governance is an excellent principle and the media cannot be criticized for playing up the report when offered the chance. But does it behoove a government to throw all considerations of national security to the winds and jeopardize it by publicizing such an episode if indeed it occurred as alleged? What kind of government is ruling India , and what kind of priorities does it have?

Finally, one cannot but reflect once again whether there can ever be accountability in our collapsing democracy unless the President discharges the responsibilities assigned to his post by our Constitution. It is weeks since communal riots exposed the failure of law and order in Uttar Pradesh. Every single party spokesperson has demanded that the government be dismissed. Official spokespersons of the Congress have said that law and order has collapsed. Yet the central government remains a mute spectator although it claims that the rule of law has collapsed in the state. Neither the Prime Minister nor the President has taken a single tiny step to introduce Governor’s rule. The latest episode related to the TSD report has grave implications for the state of affairs in our armed forces as well as for national security. The President as the Supreme Commander of the armed forces is directly responsible to safeguard both. Will he still remain mute?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Modi’s poll campaign error! Sep

19

      Rate This

From all accounts Mr. Narendra Modi’s inaugural campaign rally in Rewari after being anointed Prime Ministerial candidate of the BJP was the largest ever seen in the district. In some of his earlier rallies also common people had flocked to his meetings with great enthusiasm. Obviously, in addition to the formidable publicity and mobilization organized by the RSS and powerful business interests supporting Mr. Modi, certain qualities of his persona too have caught the imagination of the masses. This has been seized by political analysts and his party’s leaders to describe Mr. Modi as the first great national Other Backward Classes (OBC) leader who might become Prime Minister. Media analysts may be forgiven for their ignorance of political ground realities to describe Mr. Modi as a national OBC leader. But surely the poll managers of the BJP ought to have known better?

It is a grievous flaw to describe Mr. Modi as a national OBC icon. Not only are BJP leaders assiduously promoting this image, even Mr. Modi himself seems to have become victim of this flawed propaganda. Mr. Modi belongs to the Ghanchi caste found only in the state of Gujarat . It is a sub-caste in the OBC category. People belonging to the Teli caste in other states may empathize with the Ghanchi caste because of a shared occupational history related to extraction of oil. Otherwise the Ghanchi caste will have little relevance outside Gujarat . Belonging to the Ghanchi caste makes Mr. Modi an OBC leader. It does not make him a national icon of OBC voters. There is no national OBC icon. There cannot be a national OBC icon. There can only be a national icon who is an OBC. The distinction should be appreciated.

The very logic of caste identity runs counter to a nationwide OBC identity. Caste mobilization becomes easy precisely because the approach is tribal. Caste leaders often unite to make common cause. That makes it easy and convenient for the big business corporate sector to use money power to split or align political forces to suit their interest. But when have castes en block voted for a leader belonging to another caste because of his OBC status? Why do not the Kurmis in Bihar vote for Mr. Laloo Yadav, or the Yadavs vote for Mr. Nitish Kumar? Before Mr. Modi became his party’s election campaign chief the BJP had already laid the ground for positive poll results in UP after Mr. Rajnath Singh brought back Mr. Kalyan Singh into his party’s fold. The revived Thakur-Kurmi alliance had earlier brought the BJP its largest ever parliamentry tally of 57 MPs. With Miss Uma Bharati entering UP politics, in addition to her oratory expected to consolidate the Hindutva vote bank, she will also undoubtedly attract Lodh voters belonging to her caste.

Yet media analysts and BJP poll managers are busy trying to exploit Mr. Modi’s OBC status to project him as the first great OBC national leader who might become Prime Minister. Unfortunately, Mr. Modi has bought this flawed approach. Celebrating his birthday recently in Gujarat Mr. Modi reached out and invited many OBC leaders of the organized and unorganized sectors to his function. National thinking has become so corrupted and distorted by the caste reservation policy and mobilization of quick vote banks that an obvious truth escaped media analysts as well as the poll campaign managers of the BJP. If enthusiastic masses have flocked to Mr. Modi’s rallies it is not because he is a national OBC icon. It is because people have recognized that Mr. Modi has risen from very humble origins like themselves to acquire a national political status. If the masses empathize with Mr. Modi it is not because he is an OBC but because he was poor and is now powerful.

The flawed approach adopted by Mr. Modi and the BJP regarding the importance of his OBC status can have very far reaching consequences. It will determine what kind of Indian will emerge tomorrow if Mr. Modi does become Prime Minister. On his birthday Mr. Modi invited OBC leaders belonging to the organized and unorganized sectors of labour. OBC leaders can mobilize votes. That is an understandably attractive attribute. But so can union leaders of organized and unorganized labour mobilize voters. Why could not Mr. Modi have focused on them instead? Does Mr. Modi seek an India of his dreams symbolized by his proposed Statue of Unity to consolidate on the prevalent national divisive culture based upon over 4000 contending castes battling for economic crumbs?

Or does he seek to create a new Indian with a national identity above caste and community ready to confront the 21st century world? Will he support caste-based reservation or economic criteria for job and educational reservation? Will he promote universal compulsory primary education to lift all castes from poverty? These are some questions that Mr. Modi and the leaders of the BJP need to ponder if they seek a genuine political change. They have to decide whether they want victory in the present or a victory for the future. Do they want to cater to India of the present or to India of the future that will belong to the young?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Modi’s proposed Statue of Unity! Sep

17

      1 Vote

Concluding his first public rally in Rewari after being anointed Prime Ministerial candidate of the BJP, Mr. Narendra Modi appealed to his audience to donate pieces of iron from each village in the state to be used for constructing his proposed Statue of Unity on the sea coast of Gujarat . Mr. Modi wants similar donations of iron pieces from each village in each state across the nation in honour of Sardar Vallabhai Patel who will symbolize unity in the proposed statue. Mr. Modi has declared his intention of constructing the tallest statue in the world, taller than America ’s Statue of Liberty, in honour of Sardar Patel.

This writer has serious objection to the proposal. Sardar Patel was undoubtedly a very great man, as were Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru. Patel performed great service to the nation by unifying the princely states of India after Independence . But though these great leaders did great things for the nation they also committed unforgivable errors the consequence of which continue to haunt our nation. These leaders, mainly Sardar Patel, united Bharat but they divided India . They divided India without the slightest justification. They divided India because they allowed themselves to be influenced and manipulated by the British.

With just over 1000 people killed in Punjab through communal riots engineered by the British administration immediately after Lord Mountbatten became India ’s Viceroy, and about 12000 killed in Bihar and Bengal over a period of two years, these leaders violated their solemn pledge to the people of India by accepting Partition. Gandhi on the fateful day, June 3, 1947 when the Congress formally accepted Partition, conveniently observed his ‘day of silence’. Nehru and Patel were the hawks in the Congress Working Committee in favour of accepting Partition. JB Kripalani, Jayaprakash Narain and Ram Manohar Lohia who opposed Partition were overruled by the rest. On June 2, on eve of the decision, Gandhi assured Mountbatten who visited him that he would not create any hurdles against the decision.

In what manner then might Sardar Patel symbolize unity? After two lawyers from Gujarat, Gandhi and Jinnah, and two aristocrats from Uttar Pradesh, Nehru and Liaquat Ali, butchered and cut asunder Punjab and Bengal displaying their ignorance about the ground realities in these states, people today should display some sensitivity towards the sentiments of provinces where over a million people were slaughtered and over ten million rendered homeless due to the follies of these leaders. In case critics challenge this view about the unforgivable decision about the Partition, let them note that both Gandhi and Nehru acknowledged their error. Gandhi wanted to settle down in Pakistan to undo the Partition just before he was assassinated thanks to ignored security measures during Sardar Patel’s tenure as Home Minister. Nehru sent Sheikh Abdullah to Pakistan to plead with President Ayub Khan to reunite India and Pakistan through a proposed confederation during which effort he died.

Therefore this writer would like to remind Mr. Narendra Modi and many others from different parts of India that they may have their history and may choose to honour whom they wish. The peoples of Punjab and Bengal have their own history and their own memories to recall. Congress leaders today may be the best in the land. They are welcome to govern India . But the Congress Party as Imperial Britain’s instrument to partition India deserves to be buried. Let Congress leaders reinvent themselves into a new organization. After all, this demand merely echoes the last wish of the most revered Congress icon, Mahatma Gandhi, on the day before he died.

Mr. Modi is welcome to construct his Statue of Unity. The people of Punjab and Bengal might seek their own way of responding to history. Human folly can delay but not derail history. Ultimately, cultural nationalism will triumph.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Profit & Loss of UP riots! Sep

14

      Rate This

All political parties and media outlets seem agreed that the recent Muzzafarnagar riots which cost 40 lives and brought untold misery to thousands who fled their homes, were the result of a conspiracy. But all seem to disagree about who was behind the conspiracy. The UP government was suspiciously lax in acting on warnings issued by the central government months earlier. Inexplicably it allowed a Jat mahapanchayat of 1.5 lakh people just 20 km from Muzaffarnagar in violation of prohibitory orders in force in the entire district due to prevailing tension. Thousands of vehicles and tractors from Haryana, Delhi and the neighbouring districts of UP were allowed to descend on the venue of the mahapanchayat. One UP minister has acknowledged that there was an administrative lapse. Samajwadi Party (SP) leader Mr. Mulayam Singh was at pains to stress that the riots were not communal but ethnic – between Jats and Muslims. Chief Minister Mr. Akhilesh Yadav has accused other political parties for the conspiracy.

The UP administration has charged that a five minute fake video was used to fan violence. One BJP leader has been arrested in connection with that video. The district administration of Muzafarnagar lodged criminal cases against a senior BJP leader and former minister along with three other BJP leaders for violating the prohibitory order and allegedly delivered provocative speeches during the Jat mahapanchayat. The BJP leaders have denied charges. Leaders of the Bharat Kisan Union (BKU) and the Congress were also charged on similar grounds. Allegations and counter allegations of conspiracy to instigate the riots flew thick and fast between the BJP, SP, Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) and Congress. However, it is futile to speculate who was behind the conspiracy. It is futile to speculate that if there was indeed a conspiracy, whether it was the work of individual politicians or was it sanctioned by their respective political organizations. What can be assessed with some accuracy is the political impact of riots. Which party gained, and which party lost?

The SP is a huge loser. It is likely to lose its Muslim vote which is vital for its electoral success. Had Muzzafarnagar limited itself to communal tension the SP would have gained. That explains the seemingly deliberate administrative dereliction of duty. The Muslims of West UP who supported Mr. Ajit Singh’s Rashtriya Lok DaL (RLD) might have been weaned away to support SP. But things got out of hand. The Jat mahapanchayat was followed by horrendous riots. The government’s failure has left the Muslim community bitter and alienated.

The BSP could be a gainer. The first Muslim priority as of present is to remove this government. In the assembly elections the BSP offers the best chance of doing it. Similarly the Congress could be a gainer. For parliamentary elections the Muslim vote will attempt to block the BJP. On present reckoning the Congress provides the only hope of accomplishing that.

The BJP is the biggest gainer. Notwithstanding Mr. Mulayam Singh’s nitpicking distinction between communal riots and ethnic riots, the accession of the Jat vote to the BJP, along with widespread communal polarization following the riots across the state, could provide a huge boost to BJP prospects.

The RLD is the biggest loser. The traditional harmony between Muslims and Jats carefully nurtured by the late Choudhary Charan Singh rendered West UP a solid base for the RLD. That harmony has been shattered. The cost of this division will be very heavy. It could destroy the dream of carving a new state of Harit Pradesh in West UP. Both the Jats and the Muslims yearned for it. The Muslims are one third of the population in the region. The Deoband centre of religious learning is in the region. The destruction of the fine balance between Jats and Muslims may be irreparable for a long time. Both communities may now repent at leisure.

It is in this cynical way that politicians will calculate the outcome of the Muzzafarnagar riots. They will not spare a thought for the heartrending tragedy befallen to innocent women and children. Their crime was that they belonged to a community. Their weakness was that they were poor. Their tragedy was that they lived in a country where politics is conducted by a cynical, cruel and corrupt class of leaders.

Share this:

1 Comment

Posted in Nation

Modified Modi! Sep

12

      2 Votes

According to media reports the BJP will formally anoint Mr. Narendra Modi as its Prime Ministerial candidate when the party’s parliamentary board meeting is held on Friday. Some time earlier the view had been expressed in these columns that there was no substantive difference between Prime Minister Mr. Manmohan Singh and Mr. Narendra Modi insofar as approach to economic policy was concerned. Both leaders seem to be focused mainly on quick growth based upon foreign investment and delivery of maximum facilities to the big corporate sector.

However, this writer deemed Mr. Modi superior because he was described as a “muscular” version of the Prime Minister. In Gujarat he offered quicker and smoother delivery to big business than the Prime Minister could at the centre. The reason was simple. There was no extra constitutional authority to derail and slow down Mr. Modi in Gujarat as the office of the National Advisory Council did to the Prime Minister in Delhi . The Prime Minister was helpless. He was appointed by Mrs. Sonia Gandhi and had to function under her direction. It was thought that Mr. Modi would have no such fetters to implement the economic model in which the Prime Minister reposed his faith. That view it seems was too hasty. Mr. Modi may in fact be no more muscular than the Prime Minister.

Recent events should leave no doubt that if Mr. Modi is declared as the BJP’s Prime Ministerial candidate it will be only due to the pressure exerted by the RSS on the party. The RSS has appointed Mr. Modi as the party’s Prime Ministerial candidate and left it to the party to announce the decision. Mr. Modi cannot be unaware of the crucial RSS support needed for his elevation. The support reportedly was promised after extended parleys and eventually the decision was taken after agreement was reached on the minimum demands conveyed by the RSS. According to media reports the four conditions set by the RSS for Mr. Modi to receive support were to pledge building a grand Ram Temple in Ayodhya, to enforce the contentious Uniform Civil Code across the country, to repeal of Article 370 in J&K and end the special status of the state, and to press for full protection of cows. All four conditions reflect policies of traditional Hindutva.

However, the merits or otherwise of the policies insisted upon by the RSS are not important. What is significant is that the RSS is insistent upon the implementation of its agenda. Like Mrs. Sonia Gandhi choosing Mr. Manmohan Singh as Prime Minister, the RSS has chosen Mr. Modi as its candidate. But unlike Mrs. Gandhi who established her National Advisory Council to offer policy directives to the government after Mr. Manmohan Singh assumed office, Mr. Mohan Bhagwat has not wasted time. He has already laid down the minimum policy agenda. This is just the start.

Many more policy directives should be expected if Mr. Modi does indeed become Prime Minister. Although Mr. Modi therefore may not prove to be a more muscular version of Mr. Manmohan Singh, constrained as he will be by an extra constitutional body, Mr. Mohan Bhagwat certainly is showing signs of being a much more muscular version of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi. This aspect needs to be considered carefully by all the supporters of Mr. Modi. It should be amply clear that apart from support by members of the public Mr. Modi is heavily backed by the most powerful big business corporate sector. Apart from Mr. Modi’s own undoubted attributes, his popularity depends heavily on the massive support rendered to him by the big business electronic media. There is nothing surprising about that. Big business will protect its own interests. But a serious question arises.

Many supporters of Mr. Modi draw comfort from the fact that he has not personally referred to any of the pro-Hindu policies associated with the hardcore Hindutva elements of the RSS. These supporters are being delusional. They betray their ignorance about how politics is played out. The approval of every action and every statement by any of the sources in the BJP will devolve on Mr. Modi as the election campaign in charge. His silence is meaningless. Silence will be taken as assent. If Mr. Modi disapproves of any policy or statement by members of his party he will have to contradict them publicly to record his dissent. Voters are influenced by whole parties and not by their perception of any one individual, however powerful or charismatic.

What should be clear therefore to all supporters of Mr. Modi, especially the powerful big business elements, is that the RSS agenda must be factored in their calculations. This is because Mr. Modi and RSS will be inseparable if he becomes the Prime Minister. There will be nothing wrong with that if Mr. Modi and the RSS see eye to eye on all policy matters. If on the other hand Mr. Modi’s personal predilection is at variance from the RSS, there could be a very serious problem. In that event Mr. Modi’s government could become as paralyzed as Mr. Manmohan Singh’s government. There would be precisely the same kind of diarchy in governance as paralyzed the UPA government. The paralysis in the UPA government became so palpable that even Congress General Secretary Mr. Digvijay Singh was constrained to acknowledge publicly that the existing system of diarchy was undesirable.

The powerful vested interests favouring Mr. Modi should therefore carefully scrutinize the total RSS agenda in order to continue their support. This applies to all the international big business executives who descended from Europe and South America to endorse Mr. Modi, to all the young Indians who seek a modern twenty-first century nation and look up to Mr. Modi, to all the biggest business houses in the nation who are solidly backing Mr. Modi, and to all the mainstream media TV anchors who swoon with excitement each time Mr. Modi sneezes. It is entirely possible of course that the RSS policies may exceed their wildest dreams of promoting economic growth and progress in India . But that is a prospect it would be more prudent for them to assess now instead of later. What needs to be understood is that either Mr. Modi is totally supportive of RSS policies, or if he is not, there are prospects once again of paralyzing diarchy that could ruin governance in India.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Post navigation← Older posts

Media’s response to Pak Envoy! Oct

9

      1 Vote

During a press interview to a foreign journalist President Pranab Mukherjee said that even if cross border terrorism was perpetrated by non-state actors as Islamabad claimed, the Pakistan government could not evade responsibility. The territory was under the jurisdiction of the government, the President pointed out. “Non-state actors do not descend from heaven,

” he said. This view was echoed by Information and Broadcasting (I&B) Minister Mr. Manish Tewari who told media that the crossing over by terrorists and non-state actors suggested either complicity or negligence by the Pakistan government. “Obviously these terrorists or non-state actors are not coming out of a vacuum,”

he said.

The Pakistan High Commissioner to India Mr. Salman Bashir gave a veiled rejoinder to these remarks. But he focused his criticism mainly against the media. He accused the media of focusing exclusively on “so-called” incursions and infiltrations from across the border.

He said:

“Whoever is making the argument that they have not descended from heaven, I want to ask who are these thousands of people who are involved in heinous acts of terrorism in Pakistan . Have they descended from heaven? We agree they have not descended from heaven, from where are they being funded and sourced?”

One can appreciate the constraints under which Pakistan ’s official envoy to India has to function. Mr. Bashir said something, and he implied something. Both his assertion and implication deserve attention. Since he thought it fit to direct his ire against the Indian media this writer takes the liberty of directly responding to his criticism.

Mr. Bashir cannot blame the Indian media of responding to continued incursions from across the border which for diplomatic compulsions he described as “so-called”. But he was right to point out the failure of the Indian government as well as the media to adequately differentiate between the government and non-state actors in Pakistan . Mr. Bashir has rightly asserted that “thousands of terrorists” are operating against Pakistan who obviously did not descend from heaven. By implication this is tacit admission of failure of the Pakistan government. It is a fact that there are substantially more victims of terrorism in Pakistan than in India including in the state of J&K. Then Mr. Bashir went on to question the source of funding and training of these terrorists. His central plea was for the enhancement of cooperation between Islamabad and New Delhi.

He said:

“We have evidence which we have shared and are prepared to share with the rest of the world and particularly with the government of India on fuelling of acts of terrorism in Pakistan .”

Mr. Bashir’s plea for greater cooperation between India and Pakistan to fight terror clearly indicates that by questioning the source of terror funding he was not pointing a finger at India . He was obviously indicating the hand of Al Qaeda which inspires global terrorism. In the light of the reality of terrorist activity in Pakistan funded and directed by global forces the Indian government is clearly remiss in not taking an initiative for closer cooperation with Pakistan to combat terror. New Delhi ’s inhibition may be explained by its continued doubts about how deeply subverted Pakistan ’s security establishment is by pro-terror elements. Well, the Indian media has no such inhibitions. Since Mr. Bashir squarely blamed the Indian media I take the liberty of directly addressing him. I put a question to the Pakistan government through him that the Indian government has failed to do.

Mr. Bashir you seek closer cooperation between India and Pakistan , you admit that there are thousands of terrorists operating inside Pakistan . You indicate that they are funded and directed from abroad. You tacitly imply though you do not state that they cannot operate without help from a section of the official machinery. I agree with your overall analysis. My question is: Will the Pakistan government accept an offer of joint intelligence and joint operations against terror to wipe out these non-state actors from both our countries?

I know that you may not deign to respond to such a question from a mere media person instead of from the government. But let me assure you. If you do answer the media will compel the Indian government to respond appropriately.

So will you respond?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

The President’s curious priorities! Oct

8

      1 Vote

After the media pointed out that the credit for the rollback of the Ordinance on convicted MPs went to President Pranab Mukherjee and not to Congress Vice-President Rahul Gandhi who exploited the President’s known reluctance to sign it, Mr. LK Advani praised the President for his decision. However, the President reacted to this praise most curiously. The President with uncalled for modesty went out of his way to dissociate himself from the decision to roll back the Ordinance. It is known that he sat over the Ordinance and was reluctant to sign it. By signing it he could have possibly attracted strictures from the Supreme Court to make his position untenable. Understandably he mulled over the matter and shared his views with UPA Ministers who called on him to discuss the Ordinance. It was after that when Mr. Rahul Gandhi jumped into the controversy to corner credit. Mr. Advani’s praise for the President therefore was a routine and unexceptionable observation.

However the President reacted to the media in response to such praise by saying:

“I cannot comment on what the Opposition has said about my role. My duties are now completely determined by the Indian Constitution.”

The praise for the President was precisely because he did follow the Constitution by not immediately signing the Ordinance. Why, then, his curiously defensive rejoinder? Eyebrows were further raised after the President’s son, Mr. Abhijeet Mukherjee, called on the chief victim of the scrapped Ordinance, Mr. Lalu Prasad Yadav, who was in jail. The popular conclusion derived from this visit was that Mr. Mukherjee had gone there to convince Mr. Yadav that the decision not to sign the Ordinance reflected no personal motive of the President but was dictated by the Constitution. This was unnecessary. Mr. Yadav one is sure is sufficiently knowledgeable to have been aware of that. If such speculation has any basis it is certainly odd that the President should be so concerned about Mr. Yadav’s feelings. The President after all is above party politics.

Alas, it does not seem that the President is as much above party politics as he should be. His continued silence over the horrendous events in Andhra is equally mystifying. After the Union government hastily declared the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh by ceding the new state of Telangana despite the state assembly being overwhelmingly opposed to the measure, the entire state is in flames. Apart from mammoth public protest and indefinite fasts launched by politicians, the whole state is without electric power because of a strike by workers. And this situation has been growing and worsening for days. Has not the Constitutional machinery in the state collapsed to necessitate the application of Article 356 to impose President’s rule in Andhra to restore order? But the Prime Minister and the Union cabinet are mute.

Surprisingly, even the President is silent. Article 78 (b) of the Constitution states: “It shall be the duty of the Prime Minister to furnish such information relating to the administration of the affairs of the Union and proposals for legislation as the President may call for.” Should not the President invoke this Article and initiate action? Surely the millions of agitated people in Andhra Pradesh deserve as much attention as Mr. Lalu Yadav should get?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Snooping, security and privacy! Oct

5

      1 Vote

After Julian Assange and the Wikileaks controversy it is the Edgar Snowden affair that has rocked the world. Snowden was a government contractor working at the National Security Agency (NSA) in America. The NSA in order to protect the US snoops on citizens in America and abroad looking for terrorist connections. The NSA collects and analyses foreign communication and foreign signals of intelligence in order to protect the US. In an interview in Hong Kong Snowden leaked top-secret government surveillance programs that led to an international debate over national security versus individual privacy. In a recent statement to the European Parliament Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Snowden said:

“A culture of secrecy has denied our societies the opportunity to determine the appropriate balance between the human right of privacy and the governmental interest in investigation.”

Among Snowden’s leaks was information about secret US surveillance of foreign governments including Brazil and India. The Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff in protest lashed out at the US in the UN General Assembly and canceled her official visit to Washington. Critics in India not only criticized the US but berated the Indian government after disclosures that it had also like America and China snooped on citizens.

Whatever the extent of public outrage over official snooping, it will not and cannot stop. The world needs a reality check. As long as terrorism survives in the world and weapons of mass destruction can be manufactured by private citizens in a garage, surveillance is a survival imperative for governments. What is required is that such surveillance by all governments be monitored and controlled by the UN.

Technology has not only enabled private citizens to manufacture weapons of mass destruction, but also to snoop on governments and citizens alike. In the foreseeable future therefore privacy cannot be guaranteed for any citizen or government. In the event is it not prudent for people to adjust to the new reality? In other words technology will render total transparency for governments and private citizens unavoidable. It will signify a game changing new culture for mankind. Should not people therefore start adjusting to this change and make their lives totally transparent? It may lead to a happier and safer world.

Indeed, there could well be advantages in being snooped upon! While many people criticize the government’s snooping policy, so do I but for different reasons. My complaint is that the government does not bug my telephone, hack my computer or bug my regular haunts where I have coffee sessions with friends. I want to be heard but nobody listens. Does the government think that it is only the rich and the powerful that can provide useful information?

So can ordinary people like this writer. The government should bug ordinary people too in order to create a level playing field. Not only Neera Radia and Amar Singh are worth snooping on. People like me too have valuable ideas that would help the government. Alas! All my ideas and the pearls of wisdom exchanged with friends go waste because the government does not snoop on me. If the government were to do so would not some of that wisdom penetrate the dense minds of our rulers to improve governance and conditions in our nation?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Politics of convicted MPs! Oct

3

      1 Vote

The current controversy over the Supreme Court (SC) judgment and the government’s Ordinance on the continuance of convicted MPs in legislatures needs to be appreciated in its proper perspective. Right now corruption is a very emotive issue. The public not surprisingly has jumped to the conclusion that the Ordinance which sought to overrule the SC judgment was part of political chicanery. But to what extent does the SC judgment or for that matter the Ordinance actually affect the prevalence of corruption in the system? Is everybody in the government, parliament and judiciary missing the wood for the trees?

The existing Representation of Peoples (RP) Act was challenged by two writ petitions filed by advocate Lily Thomas and Lok Prahari, through its General Secretary S. N. Shukla. The petitioners questioned the legality of MPs continuing in parliament despite conviction by obtaining a stay order and further hearing from a higher court. The SC considered the RP Act unconstitutional and ruled that immediately after conviction the MP with a sentence of two or more years.must be disqualified. The Union cabinet drafted an ordinance to neutralize the Supreme Court’s order mandating immediate disqualification. The government held that if the conviction was stayed by the higher court within 90 days the elected representative should not be disqualified. But the government in its ordinance denied the convicted MP perks and voting rights till being cleared by a higher court. Only, the MP’s seat would remain occupied and there would be no by-election.

Recognizing ground realities the government considered the ease with which motivated and fraudulent prosecution and conviction could be secured from lower courts to harm even innocent politicians. Law Minister Kapil Sibal said that “everybody knows the judicial system has miserably failed to save itself from corruption charges and nepotism”. Even though the Ordinance remedy may be flawed the truth of judicial corruption cannot be denied and has indeed been voiced by Supreme Court judges and reputed jurists.

The media has gone to town attributing Rahul Gandhi’s outburst against the Ordinance as the trigger to clean up the system and check corruption and criminalization. The reality is of course that it was the President’s doubts about the legality of the Ordinance conveyed to cabinet ministers that was seized by the Congress party to enact Rahul Gandhi’s drama in order to obtain credit. The entire issue is being projected by the media and perhaps being swallowed by the public as a great fight against corruption launched by the Congress inspired by Rahul Gandhi. This is laughable. The politicians, the judiciary and the media are living in world of make believe. Consider the reality.

Two MPs, Lalu Yadav and Rashid Masood have been unseated in parliament after being convicted in corruption cases. Their corruption was committed decades ago. Lalu Yadav has been convicted after 17 years and Masood has been convicted after 23 years of their misdemeanors. Even if neither was a sitting MP both would have enjoyed three of four terms of being in parliament before this recent conviction. What kind of fight against corruption and cleansing of parliament is that? Currently there would be a dozen leading MPs involved in corruption during the Commonwealth Games and other mega scams under investigation and facing court proceedings. Will they be unseated after remaining in parliament for the next several terms and being convicted after a few decades?

The prime need is to make mandatory the completion of all court cases within six months so that speedy justice can punish the guilty. That calls for serious judicial reform. Instead of addressing that the obsession with legal nitpicking related to the RP Act through Supreme Court rulings and government Ordinances is meaningless and irrelevant. It is designed only to deceive the public into believing that corruption is genuinely being fought.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

PM’s US trip succeeds despite sabotage! Oct

1

      1 Vote

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to America has been as successful as could be reasonably expected. It was a crucial trip during which the PM met President Obama, Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and heads of other SAARC nations. In his meeting with President Obama a game changing breakthrough was achieved not sufficiently appreciated by analysts. America and India have agreed to become closest partners for defence cooperation. For transfer of defence technology India ’s relations with the US are now at par with Britain.

This is what Pandit Nehru sought from President Kennedy after the Sino-Indian conflict of 1962 when the latter’s death aborted the effort. This is what President Bush sought when he signed the nuclear deal but that effort failed because the Indian government scared of domestic criticism failed to deliver. Now agreement has been reached. The first sign of change is evident from India ’s consent to participate in joint naval exercises in the world’s largest maritime exercise involving dozens of countries. China is not invited to the exercise and the People’s Liberation Army has expressed strong opposition to it. Regardless of the PM’s future the Indo-US deal has been signed. It is likely to endure because it is not between political parties but between governments.

The PM’s meeting with his Pakistani counterpart was as crucial. Though no breakthrough was achieved or attempted the ice was broken. Contrary to the expectations of sceptics the PM addressed India ’s immediate concerns about border violations and terror camps. Mr. Sharif did acknowledge those concerns and promised action to stabilize the border. After he delivers some results the PMs will meet to carry the dialogue further. Already undated invitations for such meeting have been extended. If the PM achieved a big step forward towards the US , he also managed a baby half-step towards Pakistan . Now it remains to be seen how the agreements of this visit actually translate into results.

Anyone following the run-up to the Prime Minister’s visit would marvel at the number of glitches that suddenly erupted to mar its prospects. And for each manufactured event to scuttle progress in the talks the media played its part by a hysterical negative approach to the visit. The opposition parties by their strident criticism of the PM while he was abroad, throwing all accepted diplomatic norms to the winds, also played its part. It is a well established norm that opposition parties do not attack a head of state when he is abroad or when opposition leaders themselves are abroad. This is what democratic bipartisan approach to foreign policy denotes. But the BJP launched a shrill attack against the PM demanding an explanation while he was in the US.

The rot started with Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi. He enacted a preplanned unprecedented theatrical performance to rubbish the PM just hours before he was scheduled to meet President Obama. This demeaned the PM in the eyes of the opposition and demands for his resignation were voiced. It is a reflection of our sick state of politics that even the PM’s former press Advisor Mr. Sanjay Baru was swept along the popular current to advise the PM to resign. It is amazing that not a single voice within or outside the Congress party has made the obvious democratic demand. After the intemperate, ill-timed and irresponsible statement by the ruling party’s vice-president to damage prospects of international negotiations, it is Rahul Gandhi who should be sacked from his post if he does not voluntarily resign.

Why should the PM be asked to quit?

Narendra Modi in a public rally in Delhi lashed out at Gandhi. But he was equally amiss himself. In his speech he sought to damage the PM’s foreign visit by uttering two falsehoods. The first was that the PM had allegedly lamented to Obama that India was a very poor nation in need of help. From where did Modi get his information?

From all accounts the PM discussed terrorism and not India ’s poverty. The second falsehood was even more intriguing. Based upon a TV quote by a noted Pakistani journalist Modi attempted to further muddy the atmosphere just hours before the PM and Nawaz Sharif were to meet. He quoted Pakistani anchor of Geo TV, Hamid Mir, who alleged on TV that Nawaz Sharif had described the PM as a “village woman” pleading before the US President. This was supposed to be said over a breakfast interview given by Sharif to two other journalists and Mir. The two other journalists, Barkha Dutt and a Pakistani journalist Absar Alam, both denied Mir’s version. It seemed that Sharif said that concerns against Pakistan could be addressed directly to Islamabad instead of to Washington.

This was in line with India ’s consistent stand contrary to Pakistan ’s earlier approach that Indo-Pak ties should be bilateral without third party intervention. After Barkha Dutt and Absar Alam rubbished Mir’s claims the latter confessed that Sharif made no criticism of the PM. He lamely tried to explain away his contradicted version by saying that Sharif spoke in jest. But why did not Mir say this in his original comment on TV? In that remark he even indicated that Sharif considered Manmohan Singh weak and was looking forward to doing business with his successor after 2014.

One will not speculate whether all this happened by coincidence or by design, and if by design, the inspiration of these incidents. Hamid Mir is a powerful and influential TV journalist in Pakistan. Currently there are differences between the Pakistan army and the civil government over how to tackle the Taliban. Nawaz Sharif is seeking a dialogue. The army wants to continue with the status quo by “fighting” the Taliban. Mir sympathized with the army by stating:

“It’s a very complicated situation. The army does not seem to be in the mood for talks as it has gained a lot of ground against the Taliban in the recent past.”

Mir should know. He has after all excellent contacts. He was in fact the last journalist to interview slain Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin laden in Afghanistan in 2002. It is difficult to believe that he could have accomplished this without the clearance, if not cooperation, of the ISI.

In summation, Rahul Gandhi, Narendra Modi and Hamid Mir all passed comments that could have damaged the PM’s US visit. Large sections of big business electronic media and the opposition joined them. Modi and Gandhi are repeatedly projected by the media as the two contenders for becoming prime minister. It is ironic that both contenders are on the same side insofar as the PM’s negotiations in the US were concerned. It is also intriguing that these three fed on each other’s narrative to rubbish the PM. But then, this does not necessarily suggest collusion. It could be pure coincidence. As for big business that funds both media and politics it may matter little which contender becomes PM. Heads I win, tails you lose!

For big business Modi and Gandhi might well be two sides of the same coin. But beyond business interests of the corporate sector there are also powerful international forces interested in damaging relations between India and the US , as well as between India and Pakistan . Now which international forces would be pleased if Indo-US and Indo-Pak elations deteriorated? It is for readers to ponder and arrive at their own conclusions.

Image (c) ibnlive.in.com

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

The great Congress mystery! Sep

30

      4 Votes

There is a mystery related to the functioning of the Congress party that nobody I have asked has been able to clear. The latest episode heightens the mystery. The Union cabinet along with the core group of the Congress party in the presence and with the consent of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi approved the draft of the Ordinance to protect criminal MPs. After the Ordinance was presented to the President he expressed doubts about its legality and delayed signing it. Meanwhile the opposition mounted a blistering attack against the Ordinance. Cabinet ministers and Congress party leaders stoutly defended the Ordinance and accused the opposition of being complicit in the decision to draft the Bill protecting criminal MPs.

Then Congress Vice President Mr. Rahul Gandhi without notice intervened in a Congress press conference and condemned the Ordinance in very strong and intemperate language. He did this while the PM was abroad about to hold very crucial meetings with several heads of states. The timing of Mr. Gandhi’s remarks was so significant that had he not been a leader of such limited understanding one might have concluded that he was representing a hostile foreign power seeking to damage India ’s foreign policy.

After Mr. Gandhi spoke the cabinet ministers and Congress party leaders instead of criticizing his performance somersaulted and fell in line making nonsense of their own earlier publicly stated remarks. This writer has never in his long career seen such a craven display of sycophancy and lack of self respect and honour as long as can be remembered.

Here then is the mystery. What is the secret of Mrs. Gandhi’s hold on all members of the Congress party? She cannot get votes. Her party is performing badly even in her own constituency despite campaigning by her and her family members. She has been accused by credible international sources of receiving illegal funds from foreign sources. She has been accused by credible international sources of having a secret illegal foreign bank account. She has never taken the trouble to deny charges. She has not displayed any significant expertise related to economic, foreign or political policy. Her son, Mr. Rahul Gandhi, is even less accomplished than her. There are serious and credible allegations of his having been detained in the US possessing unaccounted money and drugs and subsequently being released through intervention of the Indian government.

Despite all this, Congress party members from top to bottom behave like craven slaves of mother and son. One cannot fathom the reason for this. One would like to be enlightened. In conclusion this writer would like to clarify that he is not critical mainly of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi or Mr. Rahul Gandhi. They look after their interests as all people are expected to. It is the members of the Congress party that attract the strongest possible criticism. So obnoxious and counter productive is their conduct that it strengthens this writer’s belief that the Congress party must be buried in order to preserve Indian democracy.

Share this:

5 Comments

Posted in Nation

Kashmir exposures Convert crisis into opportunity! Sep

27

      1 Vote

Government should not overspend effort to undo the political damage inflicted by the recent leaked allegations by the Ministry of Defence and General VK Singh. The damage to India’s case in Kashmir cannot be undone. Just days after the recent disclosure terrorists have struck in Jammu to kill army and police personnel. More attacks should be expected by terrorists emboldened by the disclosures vindicating their allegations. Politics is about perception of facts and not about facts themselves. The recent disclosures have confirmed in the public mind all the perceived truths about India’s relationship with Kashmir repeatedly articulated by separatists and many other foreign powers. The government should instead seize the moment to convert a setback into opportunity and settle once and for all the Kashmir dispute that has bedeviled the subcontinent’s peace since Independence.

However, in order to attempt that the government must be honest enough to confront the truth and bold enough to dare an initiative.

What is the truth?

One need no iterate the oft repeated facts relating to the Kashmir dispute. Kashmir is not the problem but the symptom of the problem. The problem is the Partition. Kashmir was a state with contiguous borders with both India and Pakistan. The Hindu ruler of this Muslim majority state wanted independence and good relations with both nations. The attack by Pakistani raiders backed by its army to forcibly seize Kashmir forced the ruler’s hands. He acceded to India in order to obtain the Indian army’s help to repulse the enemy.

As Kashmir Chief Minister Mr. Omar Abdullah pointed out recently, Kashmir unlike other princely states of the Indian Union did not merge with India but stopped short after accession. That is why it has a special status and Article 370. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru at the time of accepting Kashmir’s instrument of accession stated that it was “subject to the will of the people of Kashmir”. This was followed by India’s acceptance of the UN Resolution regarding Plebiscite in Kashmir. For over six decades stupid policies pursued by the governments of India and Pakistan, both acting like foreign pawns, has denied the region peace and stability. The distorted approach of both governments that have behaved like Raja Jaichand and Mir Jafar to ally with foreigners against their own flesh and blood has its roots in the Partition.

Britain offered the opportunity to keep India united by presenting the Cabinet Mission Plan that would have created a federation. Jinnah accepted the proposal. Nehru rejected it because the Plan allowed the Muslim dominated units to secede after 10 years if they so wished. Like pathetic colonial minions the leaders of India and Pakistan accepted Independence and Partition without the borders of the new nations determined. Immediately after Independence, accompanied by Partition, riots engineered by interested foreign powers to perpetuate the division cost a million lives within a few months. Similarly the engineered Kashmir dispute led to the partition of the state in order to create a permanent bone of contention that would prevent reunification.

Nehru, who had rejected the Cabinet Mission Plan and a confederation when these were offered, attempted before his death to undo the spirit of the Partition by creating an Indo-Pakistan confederation. In 1959 President Ayub Khan offered joint defence that would have automatically led to a confederation. But the same President Ayub Khan rejected Nehru’s proposal of a confederation presented by Sheikh Abdullah which Jinnah had accepted at the time of the Cabinet Mission Plan. In other words, both India and Pakistan had wanted confederation. But they had wanted it at different times. Therefore they cannot agree. Is this not shocking diplomacy? The absence of statesmanship displayed by leaders of both governments and their readiness to serve foreign interests could not be more glaring.

The latest revelations by the Indian government and General VK Singh have made prospects of reconciliation ever more remote. Peace will come only if the leaders of India and Pakistan are bold enough to cut the Gordian knot and make a dramatic breakthrough. Critics have opposed the proposed meeting between the Prime Ministers of India and Pakistan scheduled for September 29 in New York. BJP leader and former foreign minister Mr. Yashwant Sinha has stated that such a meeting is premature as long as terrorism continues. He suggested that lower officials should first meet. One begs to differ. Even if lower officials meet and people to people contacts continue for a hundred years there will be no progress.

The problem is the trust deficit. That exists between governments and not between peoples. That exists because the armies of both nations are in contention. Only joint defence and operations to wipe out terrorism from the region will remove the trust deficit. There are more victims of terrorism in Pakistan than in India. Prime Minister Mr. Manmohan Singh should bluntly tell Mr. Nawaz Sharif on September 29 that enough is enough. Unless the armies of both nations cooperate there cannot be peace and stability in the region. If even now, when both nations are besieged by terrorism and instability, their governments cannot act rationally, they never will. Without joint defence the trust deficit cannot be removed. If there is joint defence it must inevitably lead to some form of confederation. Both leaders should read the writing on the wall. They should forget what their critics might say today. They should focus on what historians will say tomorrow.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Politicians, Army, playing with fire! Sep

25

      1 Vote

General VK Singh reportedly has decided to file an application with the Right to Information (RTI) commission seeking a copy of General Vinod Bhatia’s secret report on the alleged misuse of the top secret Technical Support Division (TSD) during his tenure as Army Chief. Will the government respond by releasing the secret report? After news of the report appeared in the media the government stated that the report “impinges on matters of national security and, as such, the government will take a decision and further actions after careful examination.” If the contents of the report impinge on national security it is difficult to see how the government can agree to release the report.

However, then a further question is raised. If the report will not be released to the public how was it allowed to be leaked to the media? After the media exposure the government did not deny the report or displayed reticence but went out of its way to acknowledge its contents and resolved to probe the affair. One spokesperson of the Congress party blithely informed TV that since the media had obtained the report the matter had to be fully probed. But the government has not addressed the obvious question of how the media obtained the report. From all accounts it has not ordered an inquiry into who leaked the report and taken steps to punish the guilty. The circumstantial evidence of the government itself leaking the report is compelling. In the pursuit of petty partisan politics was the government oblivious of the grave implications that might flow from the leakage?

That is not all. Politicians further endangered the situation. BJP President Mr. Rajnath Singh defended General VK Singh and charged the UPA government with targeting him because he shared a platform with Mr. Narendra Modi. The Punjab Congress was quick to retaliate. Captain Amarinder Singh reiterated the allegation in the report that General VK Singh had misused TSD to attempt scuttling the appointment of the current Army Chief General Bikram Singh. He challenged Punjab Chief Minister Mr. Prakash Singh Badal to clarify his stand since he was supporting the BJP and Mr. Narendra Modi.

Have India ’s politicians gone stark raving mad? In the pursuit of their stupid and petty rivalries they are creating a situation that could encourage polarization between Hindu and Sikh, between Haryana and Punjab . Whatever the truth of real or imagined differences between army generals, these might be based upon entirely professional grounds. But in public perception the differences could most likely be seen as between communities and states. If such perception is allowed to grow, how will it affect all the ranks in the army?

The TSD unit was conceived and created after the 26/11 terrorist attack in Mumbai. The purpose of this top secret unit was to counter terrorism. Now not only the existence of this top secret unit is blown, but efforts are actually being made to reveal its operations and functioning in order to settle political scores. The most far reaching consequences of this sorry episode might well be General VK Singh rebuttal of the allegations against him publicized by the government. In an interview to Times Now TV channel he furnished damaging details of how the army has been operating in Jammu and Kashmir for the past many decades. His revelations make mockery of India ’s official stand on Kashmir.

One can imagine how gleefully members of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) in China and the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) in Pakistan would be with rapt attention watching the unfolding exposure of the functioning of India’s top secret army unit established to counter terrorism.

Share this:

1 Comment

Posted in Nation

Has Government committed treason? Sep

22

      2 Votes

Not surprisingly the controversy created by the media exposure and its subsequent official confirmation of the alleged misuse of the Technical Services Division (TSD) by former Army Chief General VK Singh is expected to snowball into a major national crisis. But the crisis may not evolve as those who leaked the information might imagine. According to The Indian Express that published the report General Singh had conveyed a warning that if they went ahead and published it “they will get it in the neck”. General Singh reportedly told the Press Trust of India (PTI) news agency that anyone recommending a probe into the functioning of TSD was being nonsensical because its operations were meant to be secret.

General Singh might have enlightened the public a little more. The mere fact that the inquiry into the functioning of TSD was “secret” suggests that the TSD operation was not only secret but probably “top secret”. If that is the case the consequences for the government as well as for media outlets utilized by the government could be very serious. In that event even the existence of TSD should never have been publicized. Further, if there is exposure of the actual working of the top secret unit, leaking information about it may well be considered treasonable under law, regardless of whether infromation is true or false. It involves national security. Such information can help the nation’s enemies. Even knowledge of the existence of TSD can help the nation’s enemies.

Did the government factor this aspect into its calculations before rushing to the media with its leaks? The last on this issue has not been heard. Events thus far may be in fact just the start of a crisis that could traumatize the system.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

President, army and governance! Sep

21

      1 Vote

According to media reports the Defence Ministry constituted a secret Board of Officers body headed by Lt General Vinod Bhatia to probe alleged irregularities committed during the tenure of former Army Chief General VK Singh. It is alleged that General Singh set up a controversial Military Intelligence unit, Technical Services Division (TSD) that misused secret funds to conduct unauthorized covert operations that interfered in domestic politics. According to reports General Bhatia has advised a fuller probe by an external agency like the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The report alleges that TDS misused secret funds in an effort to destabilize the Jammu and Kashmir government, as well as block the promotion of the present Army Chief General Bikram Singh. The media report has furnished details about how these irregularities were sought to be accomplished.

This report was played up as a first page banner in The Indian Express, and appeared as an unobtrusive single column in the inside pages of The Times of India. The Express claims that it tried unsuccessfully to contact General VK Singh but managed to interact through a mutual contact that quoted the General to say that the report was rubbish and the government was motivated by the fact that he had shared a public platform with opposition leader Mr. Narendra Modi. General Bhatia had submitted his report to the Defence Ministry in March this year. This is an amazing episode and offers glaring evidence of how deeply governance and responsibility to preserve national security have sunk. The following questions need to be addressed.

First, now that the report has been quoted in the media it has to be established whether the allegations leveled by General Bhatia’s team of officers are valid. If true it reveals a shocking state of affairs in which a serving Army Chief can so misuse his powers to further political ends unconnected to his call of duty. If untrue, it reveals an equally shocking state of affairs in which politics has infected the armed forces to allow such false and motivated allegations to be made in order to settle differences within the Defence Ministry. Secondly, the report was submitted in March. Why has it surfaced only now almost six months later after the Defence Minister reportedly has got into the act? Does this validate General Singh’s reported comment that he is being targeted only because he shared a public platform with Mr. Narendra Modi? Thirdly, if it be assumed that the report has substance surely there are various discreet methods of addressing the issue, of even indirectly punishing the guilty, and keep the controversy away from public attention?

Transparency in governance is an excellent principle and the media cannot be criticized for playing up the report when offered the chance. But does it behoove a government to throw all considerations of national security to the winds and jeopardize it by publicizing such an episode if indeed it occurred as alleged? What kind of government is ruling India , and what kind of priorities does it have?

Finally, one cannot but reflect once again whether there can ever be accountability in our collapsing democracy unless the President discharges the responsibilities assigned to his post by our Constitution. It is weeks since communal riots exposed the failure of law and order in Uttar Pradesh. Every single party spokesperson has demanded that the government be dismissed. Official spokespersons of the Congress have said that law and order has collapsed. Yet the central government remains a mute spectator although it claims that the rule of law has collapsed in the state. Neither the Prime Minister nor the President has taken a single tiny step to introduce Governor’s rule. The latest episode related to the TSD report has grave implications for the state of affairs in our armed forces as well as for national security. The President as the Supreme Commander of the armed forces is directly responsible to safeguard both. Will he still remain mute?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Modi’s poll campaign error! Sep

19

      Rate This

From all accounts Mr. Narendra Modi’s inaugural campaign rally in Rewari after being anointed Prime Ministerial candidate of the BJP was the largest ever seen in the district. In some of his earlier rallies also common people had flocked to his meetings with great enthusiasm. Obviously, in addition to the formidable publicity and mobilization organized by the RSS and powerful business interests supporting Mr. Modi, certain qualities of his persona too have caught the imagination of the masses. This has been seized by political analysts and his party’s leaders to describe Mr. Modi as the first great national Other Backward Classes (OBC) leader who might become Prime Minister. Media analysts may be forgiven for their ignorance of political ground realities to describe Mr. Modi as a national OBC leader. But surely the poll managers of the BJP ought to have known better?

It is a grievous flaw to describe Mr. Modi as a national OBC icon. Not only are BJP leaders assiduously promoting this image, even Mr. Modi himself seems to have become victim of this flawed propaganda. Mr. Modi belongs to the Ghanchi caste found only in the state of Gujarat . It is a sub-caste in the OBC category. People belonging to the Teli caste in other states may empathize with the Ghanchi caste because of a shared occupational history related to extraction of oil. Otherwise the Ghanchi caste will have little relevance outside Gujarat . Belonging to the Ghanchi caste makes Mr. Modi an OBC leader. It does not make him a national icon of OBC voters. There is no national OBC icon. There cannot be a national OBC icon. There can only be a national icon who is an OBC. The distinction should be appreciated.

The very logic of caste identity runs counter to a nationwide OBC identity. Caste mobilization becomes easy precisely because the approach is tribal. Caste leaders often unite to make common cause. That makes it easy and convenient for the big business corporate sector to use money power to split or align political forces to suit their interest. But when have castes en block voted for a leader belonging to another caste because of his OBC status? Why do not the Kurmis in Bihar vote for Mr. Laloo Yadav, or the Yadavs vote for Mr. Nitish Kumar? Before Mr. Modi became his party’s election campaign chief the BJP had already laid the ground for positive poll results in UP after Mr. Rajnath Singh brought back Mr. Kalyan Singh into his party’s fold. The revived Thakur-Kurmi alliance had earlier brought the BJP its largest ever parliamentry tally of 57 MPs. With Miss Uma Bharati entering UP politics, in addition to her oratory expected to consolidate the Hindutva vote bank, she will also undoubtedly attract Lodh voters belonging to her caste.

Yet media analysts and BJP poll managers are busy trying to exploit Mr. Modi’s OBC status to project him as the first great OBC national leader who might become Prime Minister. Unfortunately, Mr. Modi has bought this flawed approach. Celebrating his birthday recently in Gujarat Mr. Modi reached out and invited many OBC leaders of the organized and unorganized sectors to his function. National thinking has become so corrupted and distorted by the caste reservation policy and mobilization of quick vote banks that an obvious truth escaped media analysts as well as the poll campaign managers of the BJP. If enthusiastic masses have flocked to Mr. Modi’s rallies it is not because he is a national OBC icon. It is because people have recognized that Mr. Modi has risen from very humble origins like themselves to acquire a national political status. If the masses empathize with Mr. Modi it is not because he is an OBC but because he was poor and is now powerful.

The flawed approach adopted by Mr. Modi and the BJP regarding the importance of his OBC status can have very far reaching consequences. It will determine what kind of Indian will emerge tomorrow if Mr. Modi does become Prime Minister. On his birthday Mr. Modi invited OBC leaders belonging to the organized and unorganized sectors of labour. OBC leaders can mobilize votes. That is an understandably attractive attribute. But so can union leaders of organized and unorganized labour mobilize voters. Why could not Mr. Modi have focused on them instead? Does Mr. Modi seek an India of his dreams symbolized by his proposed Statue of Unity to consolidate on the prevalent national divisive culture based upon over 4000 contending castes battling for economic crumbs?

Or does he seek to create a new Indian with a national identity above caste and community ready to confront the 21st century world? Will he support caste-based reservation or economic criteria for job and educational reservation? Will he promote universal compulsory primary education to lift all castes from poverty? These are some questions that Mr. Modi and the leaders of the BJP need to ponder if they seek a genuine political change. They have to decide whether they want victory in the present or a victory for the future. Do they want to cater to India of the present or to India of the future that will belong to the young?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Modi’s proposed Statue of Unity! Sep

17

      1 Vote

Concluding his first public rally in Rewari after being anointed Prime Ministerial candidate of the BJP, Mr. Narendra Modi appealed to his audience to donate pieces of iron from each village in the state to be used for constructing his proposed Statue of Unity on the sea coast of Gujarat . Mr. Modi wants similar donations of iron pieces from each village in each state across the nation in honour of Sardar Vallabhai Patel who will symbolize unity in the proposed statue. Mr. Modi has declared his intention of constructing the tallest statue in the world, taller than America ’s Statue of Liberty, in honour of Sardar Patel.

This writer has serious objection to the proposal. Sardar Patel was undoubtedly a very great man, as were Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru. Patel performed great service to the nation by unifying the princely states of India after Independence . But though these great leaders did great things for the nation they also committed unforgivable errors the consequence of which continue to haunt our nation. These leaders, mainly Sardar Patel, united Bharat but they divided India . They divided India without the slightest justification. They divided India because they allowed themselves to be influenced and manipulated by the British.

With just over 1000 people killed in Punjab through communal riots engineered by the British administration immediately after Lord Mountbatten became India ’s Viceroy, and about 12000 killed in Bihar and Bengal over a period of two years, these leaders violated their solemn pledge to the people of India by accepting Partition. Gandhi on the fateful day, June 3, 1947 when the Congress formally accepted Partition, conveniently observed his ‘day of silence’. Nehru and Patel were the hawks in the Congress Working Committee in favour of accepting Partition. JB Kripalani, Jayaprakash Narain and Ram Manohar Lohia who opposed Partition were overruled by the rest. On June 2, on eve of the decision, Gandhi assured Mountbatten who visited him that he would not create any hurdles against the decision.

In what manner then might Sardar Patel symbolize unity? After two lawyers from Gujarat, Gandhi and Jinnah, and two aristocrats from Uttar Pradesh, Nehru and Liaquat Ali, butchered and cut asunder Punjab and Bengal displaying their ignorance about the ground realities in these states, people today should display some sensitivity towards the sentiments of provinces where over a million people were slaughtered and over ten million rendered homeless due to the follies of these leaders. In case critics challenge this view about the unforgivable decision about the Partition, let them note that both Gandhi and Nehru acknowledged their error. Gandhi wanted to settle down in Pakistan to undo the Partition just before he was assassinated thanks to ignored security measures during Sardar Patel’s tenure as Home Minister. Nehru sent Sheikh Abdullah to Pakistan to plead with President Ayub Khan to reunite India and Pakistan through a proposed confederation during which effort he died.

Therefore this writer would like to remind Mr. Narendra Modi and many others from different parts of India that they may have their history and may choose to honour whom they wish. The peoples of Punjab and Bengal have their own history and their own memories to recall. Congress leaders today may be the best in the land. They are welcome to govern India . But the Congress Party as Imperial Britain’s instrument to partition India deserves to be buried. Let Congress leaders reinvent themselves into a new organization. After all, this demand merely echoes the last wish of the most revered Congress icon, Mahatma Gandhi, on the day before he died.

Mr. Modi is welcome to construct his Statue of Unity. The people of Punjab and Bengal might seek their own way of responding to history. Human folly can delay but not derail history. Ultimately, cultural nationalism will triumph.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Profit & Loss of UP riots! Sep

14

      Rate This

All political parties and media outlets seem agreed that the recent Muzzafarnagar riots which cost 40 lives and brought untold misery to thousands who fled their homes, were the result of a conspiracy. But all seem to disagree about who was behind the conspiracy. The UP government was suspiciously lax in acting on warnings issued by the central government months earlier. Inexplicably it allowed a Jat mahapanchayat of 1.5 lakh people just 20 km from Muzaffarnagar in violation of prohibitory orders in force in the entire district due to prevailing tension. Thousands of vehicles and tractors from Haryana, Delhi and the neighbouring districts of UP were allowed to descend on the venue of the mahapanchayat. One UP minister has acknowledged that there was an administrative lapse. Samajwadi Party (SP) leader Mr. Mulayam Singh was at pains to stress that the riots were not communal but ethnic – between Jats and Muslims. Chief Minister Mr. Akhilesh Yadav has accused other political parties for the conspiracy.

The UP administration has charged that a five minute fake video was used to fan violence. One BJP leader has been arrested in connection with that video. The district administration of Muzafarnagar lodged criminal cases against a senior BJP leader and former minister along with three other BJP leaders for violating the prohibitory order and allegedly delivered provocative speeches during the Jat mahapanchayat. The BJP leaders have denied charges. Leaders of the Bharat Kisan Union (BKU) and the Congress were also charged on similar grounds. Allegations and counter allegations of conspiracy to instigate the riots flew thick and fast between the BJP, SP, Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) and Congress. However, it is futile to speculate who was behind the conspiracy. It is futile to speculate that if there was indeed a conspiracy, whether it was the work of individual politicians or was it sanctioned by their respective political organizations. What can be assessed with some accuracy is the political impact of riots. Which party gained, and which party lost?

The SP is a huge loser. It is likely to lose its Muslim vote which is vital for its electoral success. Had Muzzafarnagar limited itself to communal tension the SP would have gained. That explains the seemingly deliberate administrative dereliction of duty. The Muslims of West UP who supported Mr. Ajit Singh’s Rashtriya Lok DaL (RLD) might have been weaned away to support SP. But things got out of hand. The Jat mahapanchayat was followed by horrendous riots. The government’s failure has left the Muslim community bitter and alienated.

The BSP could be a gainer. The first Muslim priority as of present is to remove this government. In the assembly elections the BSP offers the best chance of doing it. Similarly the Congress could be a gainer. For parliamentary elections the Muslim vote will attempt to block the BJP. On present reckoning the Congress provides the only hope of accomplishing that.

The BJP is the biggest gainer. Notwithstanding Mr. Mulayam Singh’s nitpicking distinction between communal riots and ethnic riots, the accession of the Jat vote to the BJP, along with widespread communal polarization following the riots across the state, could provide a huge boost to BJP prospects.

The RLD is the biggest loser. The traditional harmony between Muslims and Jats carefully nurtured by the late Choudhary Charan Singh rendered West UP a solid base for the RLD. That harmony has been shattered. The cost of this division will be very heavy. It could destroy the dream of carving a new state of Harit Pradesh in West UP. Both the Jats and the Muslims yearned for it. The Muslims are one third of the population in the region. The Deoband centre of religious learning is in the region. The destruction of the fine balance between Jats and Muslims may be irreparable for a long time. Both communities may now repent at leisure.

It is in this cynical way that politicians will calculate the outcome of the Muzzafarnagar riots. They will not spare a thought for the heartrending tragedy befallen to innocent women and children. Their crime was that they belonged to a community. Their weakness was that they were poor. Their tragedy was that they lived in a country where politics is conducted by a cynical, cruel and corrupt class of leaders.

Share this:

1 Comment

Posted in Nation

Modified Modi! Sep

12

      2 Votes

According to media reports the BJP will formally anoint Mr. Narendra Modi as its Prime Ministerial candidate when the party’s parliamentary board meeting is held on Friday. Some time earlier the view had been expressed in these columns that there was no substantive difference between Prime Minister Mr. Manmohan Singh and Mr. Narendra Modi insofar as approach to economic policy was concerned. Both leaders seem to be focused mainly on quick growth based upon foreign investment and delivery of maximum facilities to the big corporate sector.

However, this writer deemed Mr. Modi superior because he was described as a “muscular” version of the Prime Minister. In Gujarat he offered quicker and smoother delivery to big business than the Prime Minister could at the centre. The reason was simple. There was no extra constitutional authority to derail and slow down Mr. Modi in Gujarat as the office of the National Advisory Council did to the Prime Minister in Delhi . The Prime Minister was helpless. He was appointed by Mrs. Sonia Gandhi and had to function under her direction. It was thought that Mr. Modi would have no such fetters to implement the economic model in which the Prime Minister reposed his faith. That view it seems was too hasty. Mr. Modi may in fact be no more muscular than the Prime Minister.

Recent events should leave no doubt that if Mr. Modi is declared as the BJP’s Prime Ministerial candidate it will be only due to the pressure exerted by the RSS on the party. The RSS has appointed Mr. Modi as the party’s Prime Ministerial candidate and left it to the party to announce the decision. Mr. Modi cannot be unaware of the crucial RSS support needed for his elevation. The support reportedly was promised after extended parleys and eventually the decision was taken after agreement was reached on the minimum demands conveyed by the RSS. According to media reports the four conditions set by the RSS for Mr. Modi to receive support were to pledge building a grand Ram Temple in Ayodhya, to enforce the contentious Uniform Civil Code across the country, to repeal of Article 370 in J&K and end the special status of the state, and to press for full protection of cows. All four conditions reflect policies of traditional Hindutva.

However, the merits or otherwise of the policies insisted upon by the RSS are not important. What is significant is that the RSS is insistent upon the implementation of its agenda. Like Mrs. Sonia Gandhi choosing Mr. Manmohan Singh as Prime Minister, the RSS has chosen Mr. Modi as its candidate. But unlike Mrs. Gandhi who established her National Advisory Council to offer policy directives to the government after Mr. Manmohan Singh assumed office, Mr. Mohan Bhagwat has not wasted time. He has already laid down the minimum policy agenda. This is just the start.

Many more policy directives should be expected if Mr. Modi does indeed become Prime Minister. Although Mr. Modi therefore may not prove to be a more muscular version of Mr. Manmohan Singh, constrained as he will be by an extra constitutional body, Mr. Mohan Bhagwat certainly is showing signs of being a much more muscular version of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi. This aspect needs to be considered carefully by all the supporters of Mr. Modi. It should be amply clear that apart from support by members of the public Mr. Modi is heavily backed by the most powerful big business corporate sector. Apart from Mr. Modi’s own undoubted attributes, his popularity depends heavily on the massive support rendered to him by the big business electronic media. There is nothing surprising about that. Big business will protect its own interests. But a serious question arises.

Many supporters of Mr. Modi draw comfort from the fact that he has not personally referred to any of the pro-Hindu policies associated with the hardcore Hindutva elements of the RSS. These supporters are being delusional. They betray their ignorance about how politics is played out. The approval of every action and every statement by any of the sources in the BJP will devolve on Mr. Modi as the election campaign in charge. His silence is meaningless. Silence will be taken as assent. If Mr. Modi disapproves of any policy or statement by members of his party he will have to contradict them publicly to record his dissent. Voters are influenced by whole parties and not by their perception of any one individual, however powerful or charismatic.

What should be clear therefore to all supporters of Mr. Modi, especially the powerful big business elements, is that the RSS agenda must be factored in their calculations. This is because Mr. Modi and RSS will be inseparable if he becomes the Prime Minister. There will be nothing wrong with that if Mr. Modi and the RSS see eye to eye on all policy matters. If on the other hand Mr. Modi’s personal predilection is at variance from the RSS, there could be a very serious problem. In that event Mr. Modi’s government could become as paralyzed as Mr. Manmohan Singh’s government. There would be precisely the same kind of diarchy in governance as paralyzed the UPA government. The paralysis in the UPA government became so palpable that even Congress General Secretary Mr. Digvijay Singh was constrained to acknowledge publicly that the existing system of diarchy was undesirable.

The powerful vested interests favouring Mr. Modi should therefore carefully scrutinize the total RSS agenda in order to continue their support. This applies to all the international big business executives who descended from Europe and South America to endorse Mr. Modi, to all the young Indians who seek a modern twenty-first century nation and look up to Mr. Modi, to all the biggest business houses in the nation who are solidly backing Mr. Modi, and to all the mainstream media TV anchors who swoon with excitement each time Mr. Modi sneezes. It is entirely possible of course that the RSS policies may exceed their wildest dreams of promoting economic growth and progress in India . But that is a prospect it would be more prudent for them to assess now instead of later. What needs to be understood is that either Mr. Modi is totally supportive of RSS policies, or if he is not, there are prospects once again of paralyzing diarchy that could ruin governance in India.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Post navigation← Older posts

Media’s response to Pak Envoy! Oct

9

      1 Vote

During a press interview to a foreign journalist President Pranab Mukherjee said that even if cross border terrorism was perpetrated by non-state actors as Islamabad claimed, the Pakistan government could not evade responsibility. The territory was under the jurisdiction of the government, the President pointed out. “Non-state actors do not descend from heaven,

” he said. This view was echoed by Information and Broadcasting (I&B) Minister Mr. Manish Tewari who told media that the crossing over by terrorists and non-state actors suggested either complicity or negligence by the Pakistan government. “Obviously these terrorists or non-state actors are not coming out of a vacuum,”

he said.

The Pakistan High Commissioner to India Mr. Salman Bashir gave a veiled rejoinder to these remarks. But he focused his criticism mainly against the media. He accused the media of focusing exclusively on “so-called” incursions and infiltrations from across the border.

He said:

“Whoever is making the argument that they have not descended from heaven, I want to ask who are these thousands of people who are involved in heinous acts of terrorism in Pakistan . Have they descended from heaven? We agree they have not descended from heaven, from where are they being funded and sourced?”

One can appreciate the constraints under which Pakistan ’s official envoy to India has to function. Mr. Bashir said something, and he implied something. Both his assertion and implication deserve attention. Since he thought it fit to direct his ire against the Indian media this writer takes the liberty of directly responding to his criticism.

Mr. Bashir cannot blame the Indian media of responding to continued incursions from across the border which for diplomatic compulsions he described as “so-called”. But he was right to point out the failure of the Indian government as well as the media to adequately differentiate between the government and non-state actors in Pakistan . Mr. Bashir has rightly asserted that “thousands of terrorists” are operating against Pakistan who obviously did not descend from heaven. By implication this is tacit admission of failure of the Pakistan government. It is a fact that there are substantially more victims of terrorism in Pakistan than in India including in the state of J&K. Then Mr. Bashir went on to question the source of funding and training of these terrorists. His central plea was for the enhancement of cooperation between Islamabad and New Delhi.

He said:

“We have evidence which we have shared and are prepared to share with the rest of the world and particularly with the government of India on fuelling of acts of terrorism in Pakistan .”

Mr. Bashir’s plea for greater cooperation between India and Pakistan to fight terror clearly indicates that by questioning the source of terror funding he was not pointing a finger at India . He was obviously indicating the hand of Al Qaeda which inspires global terrorism. In the light of the reality of terrorist activity in Pakistan funded and directed by global forces the Indian government is clearly remiss in not taking an initiative for closer cooperation with Pakistan to combat terror. New Delhi ’s inhibition may be explained by its continued doubts about how deeply subverted Pakistan ’s security establishment is by pro-terror elements. Well, the Indian media has no such inhibitions. Since Mr. Bashir squarely blamed the Indian media I take the liberty of directly addressing him. I put a question to the Pakistan government through him that the Indian government has failed to do.

Mr. Bashir you seek closer cooperation between India and Pakistan , you admit that there are thousands of terrorists operating inside Pakistan . You indicate that they are funded and directed from abroad. You tacitly imply though you do not state that they cannot operate without help from a section of the official machinery. I agree with your overall analysis. My question is: Will the Pakistan government accept an offer of joint intelligence and joint operations against terror to wipe out these non-state actors from both our countries?

I know that you may not deign to respond to such a question from a mere media person instead of from the government. But let me assure you. If you do answer the media will compel the Indian government to respond appropriately.

So will you respond?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

The President’s curious priorities! Oct

8

      1 Vote

After the media pointed out that the credit for the rollback of the Ordinance on convicted MPs went to President Pranab Mukherjee and not to Congress Vice-President Rahul Gandhi who exploited the President’s known reluctance to sign it, Mr. LK Advani praised the President for his decision. However, the President reacted to this praise most curiously. The President with uncalled for modesty went out of his way to dissociate himself from the decision to roll back the Ordinance. It is known that he sat over the Ordinance and was reluctant to sign it. By signing it he could have possibly attracted strictures from the Supreme Court to make his position untenable. Understandably he mulled over the matter and shared his views with UPA Ministers who called on him to discuss the Ordinance. It was after that when Mr. Rahul Gandhi jumped into the controversy to corner credit. Mr. Advani’s praise for the President therefore was a routine and unexceptionable observation.

However the President reacted to the media in response to such praise by saying:

“I cannot comment on what the Opposition has said about my role. My duties are now completely determined by the Indian Constitution.”

The praise for the President was precisely because he did follow the Constitution by not immediately signing the Ordinance. Why, then, his curiously defensive rejoinder? Eyebrows were further raised after the President’s son, Mr. Abhijeet Mukherjee, called on the chief victim of the scrapped Ordinance, Mr. Lalu Prasad Yadav, who was in jail. The popular conclusion derived from this visit was that Mr. Mukherjee had gone there to convince Mr. Yadav that the decision not to sign the Ordinance reflected no personal motive of the President but was dictated by the Constitution. This was unnecessary. Mr. Yadav one is sure is sufficiently knowledgeable to have been aware of that. If such speculation has any basis it is certainly odd that the President should be so concerned about Mr. Yadav’s feelings. The President after all is above party politics.

Alas, it does not seem that the President is as much above party politics as he should be. His continued silence over the horrendous events in Andhra is equally mystifying. After the Union government hastily declared the bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh by ceding the new state of Telangana despite the state assembly being overwhelmingly opposed to the measure, the entire state is in flames. Apart from mammoth public protest and indefinite fasts launched by politicians, the whole state is without electric power because of a strike by workers. And this situation has been growing and worsening for days. Has not the Constitutional machinery in the state collapsed to necessitate the application of Article 356 to impose President’s rule in Andhra to restore order? But the Prime Minister and the Union cabinet are mute.

Surprisingly, even the President is silent. Article 78 (b) of the Constitution states: “It shall be the duty of the Prime Minister to furnish such information relating to the administration of the affairs of the Union and proposals for legislation as the President may call for.” Should not the President invoke this Article and initiate action? Surely the millions of agitated people in Andhra Pradesh deserve as much attention as Mr. Lalu Yadav should get?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Snooping, security and privacy! Oct

5

      1 Vote

After Julian Assange and the Wikileaks controversy it is the Edgar Snowden affair that has rocked the world. Snowden was a government contractor working at the National Security Agency (NSA) in America. The NSA in order to protect the US snoops on citizens in America and abroad looking for terrorist connections. The NSA collects and analyses foreign communication and foreign signals of intelligence in order to protect the US. In an interview in Hong Kong Snowden leaked top-secret government surveillance programs that led to an international debate over national security versus individual privacy. In a recent statement to the European Parliament Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Snowden said:

“A culture of secrecy has denied our societies the opportunity to determine the appropriate balance between the human right of privacy and the governmental interest in investigation.”

Among Snowden’s leaks was information about secret US surveillance of foreign governments including Brazil and India. The Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff in protest lashed out at the US in the UN General Assembly and canceled her official visit to Washington. Critics in India not only criticized the US but berated the Indian government after disclosures that it had also like America and China snooped on citizens.

Whatever the extent of public outrage over official snooping, it will not and cannot stop. The world needs a reality check. As long as terrorism survives in the world and weapons of mass destruction can be manufactured by private citizens in a garage, surveillance is a survival imperative for governments. What is required is that such surveillance by all governments be monitored and controlled by the UN.

Technology has not only enabled private citizens to manufacture weapons of mass destruction, but also to snoop on governments and citizens alike. In the foreseeable future therefore privacy cannot be guaranteed for any citizen or government. In the event is it not prudent for people to adjust to the new reality? In other words technology will render total transparency for governments and private citizens unavoidable. It will signify a game changing new culture for mankind. Should not people therefore start adjusting to this change and make their lives totally transparent? It may lead to a happier and safer world.

Indeed, there could well be advantages in being snooped upon! While many people criticize the government’s snooping policy, so do I but for different reasons. My complaint is that the government does not bug my telephone, hack my computer or bug my regular haunts where I have coffee sessions with friends. I want to be heard but nobody listens. Does the government think that it is only the rich and the powerful that can provide useful information?

So can ordinary people like this writer. The government should bug ordinary people too in order to create a level playing field. Not only Neera Radia and Amar Singh are worth snooping on. People like me too have valuable ideas that would help the government. Alas! All my ideas and the pearls of wisdom exchanged with friends go waste because the government does not snoop on me. If the government were to do so would not some of that wisdom penetrate the dense minds of our rulers to improve governance and conditions in our nation?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Politics of convicted MPs! Oct

3

      1 Vote

The current controversy over the Supreme Court (SC) judgment and the government’s Ordinance on the continuance of convicted MPs in legislatures needs to be appreciated in its proper perspective. Right now corruption is a very emotive issue. The public not surprisingly has jumped to the conclusion that the Ordinance which sought to overrule the SC judgment was part of political chicanery. But to what extent does the SC judgment or for that matter the Ordinance actually affect the prevalence of corruption in the system? Is everybody in the government, parliament and judiciary missing the wood for the trees?

The existing Representation of Peoples (RP) Act was challenged by two writ petitions filed by advocate Lily Thomas and Lok Prahari, through its General Secretary S. N. Shukla. The petitioners questioned the legality of MPs continuing in parliament despite conviction by obtaining a stay order and further hearing from a higher court. The SC considered the RP Act unconstitutional and ruled that immediately after conviction the MP with a sentence of two or more years.must be disqualified. The Union cabinet drafted an ordinance to neutralize the Supreme Court’s order mandating immediate disqualification. The government held that if the conviction was stayed by the higher court within 90 days the elected representative should not be disqualified. But the government in its ordinance denied the convicted MP perks and voting rights till being cleared by a higher court. Only, the MP’s seat would remain occupied and there would be no by-election.

Recognizing ground realities the government considered the ease with which motivated and fraudulent prosecution and conviction could be secured from lower courts to harm even innocent politicians. Law Minister Kapil Sibal said that “everybody knows the judicial system has miserably failed to save itself from corruption charges and nepotism”. Even though the Ordinance remedy may be flawed the truth of judicial corruption cannot be denied and has indeed been voiced by Supreme Court judges and reputed jurists.

The media has gone to town attributing Rahul Gandhi’s outburst against the Ordinance as the trigger to clean up the system and check corruption and criminalization. The reality is of course that it was the President’s doubts about the legality of the Ordinance conveyed to cabinet ministers that was seized by the Congress party to enact Rahul Gandhi’s drama in order to obtain credit. The entire issue is being projected by the media and perhaps being swallowed by the public as a great fight against corruption launched by the Congress inspired by Rahul Gandhi. This is laughable. The politicians, the judiciary and the media are living in world of make believe. Consider the reality.

Two MPs, Lalu Yadav and Rashid Masood have been unseated in parliament after being convicted in corruption cases. Their corruption was committed decades ago. Lalu Yadav has been convicted after 17 years and Masood has been convicted after 23 years of their misdemeanors. Even if neither was a sitting MP both would have enjoyed three of four terms of being in parliament before this recent conviction. What kind of fight against corruption and cleansing of parliament is that? Currently there would be a dozen leading MPs involved in corruption during the Commonwealth Games and other mega scams under investigation and facing court proceedings. Will they be unseated after remaining in parliament for the next several terms and being convicted after a few decades?

The prime need is to make mandatory the completion of all court cases within six months so that speedy justice can punish the guilty. That calls for serious judicial reform. Instead of addressing that the obsession with legal nitpicking related to the RP Act through Supreme Court rulings and government Ordinances is meaningless and irrelevant. It is designed only to deceive the public into believing that corruption is genuinely being fought.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

PM’s US trip succeeds despite sabotage! Oct

1

      1 Vote

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to America has been as successful as could be reasonably expected. It was a crucial trip during which the PM met President Obama, Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and heads of other SAARC nations. In his meeting with President Obama a game changing breakthrough was achieved not sufficiently appreciated by analysts. America and India have agreed to become closest partners for defence cooperation. For transfer of defence technology India ’s relations with the US are now at par with Britain.

This is what Pandit Nehru sought from President Kennedy after the Sino-Indian conflict of 1962 when the latter’s death aborted the effort. This is what President Bush sought when he signed the nuclear deal but that effort failed because the Indian government scared of domestic criticism failed to deliver. Now agreement has been reached. The first sign of change is evident from India ’s consent to participate in joint naval exercises in the world’s largest maritime exercise involving dozens of countries. China is not invited to the exercise and the People’s Liberation Army has expressed strong opposition to it. Regardless of the PM’s future the Indo-US deal has been signed. It is likely to endure because it is not between political parties but between governments.

The PM’s meeting with his Pakistani counterpart was as crucial. Though no breakthrough was achieved or attempted the ice was broken. Contrary to the expectations of sceptics the PM addressed India ’s immediate concerns about border violations and terror camps. Mr. Sharif did acknowledge those concerns and promised action to stabilize the border. After he delivers some results the PMs will meet to carry the dialogue further. Already undated invitations for such meeting have been extended. If the PM achieved a big step forward towards the US , he also managed a baby half-step towards Pakistan . Now it remains to be seen how the agreements of this visit actually translate into results.

Anyone following the run-up to the Prime Minister’s visit would marvel at the number of glitches that suddenly erupted to mar its prospects. And for each manufactured event to scuttle progress in the talks the media played its part by a hysterical negative approach to the visit. The opposition parties by their strident criticism of the PM while he was abroad, throwing all accepted diplomatic norms to the winds, also played its part. It is a well established norm that opposition parties do not attack a head of state when he is abroad or when opposition leaders themselves are abroad. This is what democratic bipartisan approach to foreign policy denotes. But the BJP launched a shrill attack against the PM demanding an explanation while he was in the US.

The rot started with Congress vice president Rahul Gandhi. He enacted a preplanned unprecedented theatrical performance to rubbish the PM just hours before he was scheduled to meet President Obama. This demeaned the PM in the eyes of the opposition and demands for his resignation were voiced. It is a reflection of our sick state of politics that even the PM’s former press Advisor Mr. Sanjay Baru was swept along the popular current to advise the PM to resign. It is amazing that not a single voice within or outside the Congress party has made the obvious democratic demand. After the intemperate, ill-timed and irresponsible statement by the ruling party’s vice-president to damage prospects of international negotiations, it is Rahul Gandhi who should be sacked from his post if he does not voluntarily resign.

Why should the PM be asked to quit?

Narendra Modi in a public rally in Delhi lashed out at Gandhi. But he was equally amiss himself. In his speech he sought to damage the PM’s foreign visit by uttering two falsehoods. The first was that the PM had allegedly lamented to Obama that India was a very poor nation in need of help. From where did Modi get his information?

From all accounts the PM discussed terrorism and not India ’s poverty. The second falsehood was even more intriguing. Based upon a TV quote by a noted Pakistani journalist Modi attempted to further muddy the atmosphere just hours before the PM and Nawaz Sharif were to meet. He quoted Pakistani anchor of Geo TV, Hamid Mir, who alleged on TV that Nawaz Sharif had described the PM as a “village woman” pleading before the US President. This was supposed to be said over a breakfast interview given by Sharif to two other journalists and Mir. The two other journalists, Barkha Dutt and a Pakistani journalist Absar Alam, both denied Mir’s version. It seemed that Sharif said that concerns against Pakistan could be addressed directly to Islamabad instead of to Washington.

This was in line with India ’s consistent stand contrary to Pakistan ’s earlier approach that Indo-Pak ties should be bilateral without third party intervention. After Barkha Dutt and Absar Alam rubbished Mir’s claims the latter confessed that Sharif made no criticism of the PM. He lamely tried to explain away his contradicted version by saying that Sharif spoke in jest. But why did not Mir say this in his original comment on TV? In that remark he even indicated that Sharif considered Manmohan Singh weak and was looking forward to doing business with his successor after 2014.

One will not speculate whether all this happened by coincidence or by design, and if by design, the inspiration of these incidents. Hamid Mir is a powerful and influential TV journalist in Pakistan. Currently there are differences between the Pakistan army and the civil government over how to tackle the Taliban. Nawaz Sharif is seeking a dialogue. The army wants to continue with the status quo by “fighting” the Taliban. Mir sympathized with the army by stating:

“It’s a very complicated situation. The army does not seem to be in the mood for talks as it has gained a lot of ground against the Taliban in the recent past.”

Mir should know. He has after all excellent contacts. He was in fact the last journalist to interview slain Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin laden in Afghanistan in 2002. It is difficult to believe that he could have accomplished this without the clearance, if not cooperation, of the ISI.

In summation, Rahul Gandhi, Narendra Modi and Hamid Mir all passed comments that could have damaged the PM’s US visit. Large sections of big business electronic media and the opposition joined them. Modi and Gandhi are repeatedly projected by the media as the two contenders for becoming prime minister. It is ironic that both contenders are on the same side insofar as the PM’s negotiations in the US were concerned. It is also intriguing that these three fed on each other’s narrative to rubbish the PM. But then, this does not necessarily suggest collusion. It could be pure coincidence. As for big business that funds both media and politics it may matter little which contender becomes PM. Heads I win, tails you lose!

For big business Modi and Gandhi might well be two sides of the same coin. But beyond business interests of the corporate sector there are also powerful international forces interested in damaging relations between India and the US , as well as between India and Pakistan . Now which international forces would be pleased if Indo-US and Indo-Pak elations deteriorated? It is for readers to ponder and arrive at their own conclusions.

Image (c) ibnlive.in.com

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

The great Congress mystery! Sep

30

      4 Votes

There is a mystery related to the functioning of the Congress party that nobody I have asked has been able to clear. The latest episode heightens the mystery. The Union cabinet along with the core group of the Congress party in the presence and with the consent of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi approved the draft of the Ordinance to protect criminal MPs. After the Ordinance was presented to the President he expressed doubts about its legality and delayed signing it. Meanwhile the opposition mounted a blistering attack against the Ordinance. Cabinet ministers and Congress party leaders stoutly defended the Ordinance and accused the opposition of being complicit in the decision to draft the Bill protecting criminal MPs.

Then Congress Vice President Mr. Rahul Gandhi without notice intervened in a Congress press conference and condemned the Ordinance in very strong and intemperate language. He did this while the PM was abroad about to hold very crucial meetings with several heads of states. The timing of Mr. Gandhi’s remarks was so significant that had he not been a leader of such limited understanding one might have concluded that he was representing a hostile foreign power seeking to damage India ’s foreign policy.

After Mr. Gandhi spoke the cabinet ministers and Congress party leaders instead of criticizing his performance somersaulted and fell in line making nonsense of their own earlier publicly stated remarks. This writer has never in his long career seen such a craven display of sycophancy and lack of self respect and honour as long as can be remembered.

Here then is the mystery. What is the secret of Mrs. Gandhi’s hold on all members of the Congress party? She cannot get votes. Her party is performing badly even in her own constituency despite campaigning by her and her family members. She has been accused by credible international sources of receiving illegal funds from foreign sources. She has been accused by credible international sources of having a secret illegal foreign bank account. She has never taken the trouble to deny charges. She has not displayed any significant expertise related to economic, foreign or political policy. Her son, Mr. Rahul Gandhi, is even less accomplished than her. There are serious and credible allegations of his having been detained in the US possessing unaccounted money and drugs and subsequently being released through intervention of the Indian government.

Despite all this, Congress party members from top to bottom behave like craven slaves of mother and son. One cannot fathom the reason for this. One would like to be enlightened. In conclusion this writer would like to clarify that he is not critical mainly of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi or Mr. Rahul Gandhi. They look after their interests as all people are expected to. It is the members of the Congress party that attract the strongest possible criticism. So obnoxious and counter productive is their conduct that it strengthens this writer’s belief that the Congress party must be buried in order to preserve Indian democracy.

Share this:

5 Comments

Posted in Nation

Kashmir exposures Convert crisis into opportunity! Sep

27

      1 Vote

Government should not overspend effort to undo the political damage inflicted by the recent leaked allegations by the Ministry of Defence and General VK Singh. The damage to India’s case in Kashmir cannot be undone. Just days after the recent disclosure terrorists have struck in Jammu to kill army and police personnel. More attacks should be expected by terrorists emboldened by the disclosures vindicating their allegations. Politics is about perception of facts and not about facts themselves. The recent disclosures have confirmed in the public mind all the perceived truths about India’s relationship with Kashmir repeatedly articulated by separatists and many other foreign powers. The government should instead seize the moment to convert a setback into opportunity and settle once and for all the Kashmir dispute that has bedeviled the subcontinent’s peace since Independence.

However, in order to attempt that the government must be honest enough to confront the truth and bold enough to dare an initiative.

What is the truth?

One need no iterate the oft repeated facts relating to the Kashmir dispute. Kashmir is not the problem but the symptom of the problem. The problem is the Partition. Kashmir was a state with contiguous borders with both India and Pakistan. The Hindu ruler of this Muslim majority state wanted independence and good relations with both nations. The attack by Pakistani raiders backed by its army to forcibly seize Kashmir forced the ruler’s hands. He acceded to India in order to obtain the Indian army’s help to repulse the enemy.

As Kashmir Chief Minister Mr. Omar Abdullah pointed out recently, Kashmir unlike other princely states of the Indian Union did not merge with India but stopped short after accession. That is why it has a special status and Article 370. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru at the time of accepting Kashmir’s instrument of accession stated that it was “subject to the will of the people of Kashmir”. This was followed by India’s acceptance of the UN Resolution regarding Plebiscite in Kashmir. For over six decades stupid policies pursued by the governments of India and Pakistan, both acting like foreign pawns, has denied the region peace and stability. The distorted approach of both governments that have behaved like Raja Jaichand and Mir Jafar to ally with foreigners against their own flesh and blood has its roots in the Partition.

Britain offered the opportunity to keep India united by presenting the Cabinet Mission Plan that would have created a federation. Jinnah accepted the proposal. Nehru rejected it because the Plan allowed the Muslim dominated units to secede after 10 years if they so wished. Like pathetic colonial minions the leaders of India and Pakistan accepted Independence and Partition without the borders of the new nations determined. Immediately after Independence, accompanied by Partition, riots engineered by interested foreign powers to perpetuate the division cost a million lives within a few months. Similarly the engineered Kashmir dispute led to the partition of the state in order to create a permanent bone of contention that would prevent reunification.

Nehru, who had rejected the Cabinet Mission Plan and a confederation when these were offered, attempted before his death to undo the spirit of the Partition by creating an Indo-Pakistan confederation. In 1959 President Ayub Khan offered joint defence that would have automatically led to a confederation. But the same President Ayub Khan rejected Nehru’s proposal of a confederation presented by Sheikh Abdullah which Jinnah had accepted at the time of the Cabinet Mission Plan. In other words, both India and Pakistan had wanted confederation. But they had wanted it at different times. Therefore they cannot agree. Is this not shocking diplomacy? The absence of statesmanship displayed by leaders of both governments and their readiness to serve foreign interests could not be more glaring.

The latest revelations by the Indian government and General VK Singh have made prospects of reconciliation ever more remote. Peace will come only if the leaders of India and Pakistan are bold enough to cut the Gordian knot and make a dramatic breakthrough. Critics have opposed the proposed meeting between the Prime Ministers of India and Pakistan scheduled for September 29 in New York. BJP leader and former foreign minister Mr. Yashwant Sinha has stated that such a meeting is premature as long as terrorism continues. He suggested that lower officials should first meet. One begs to differ. Even if lower officials meet and people to people contacts continue for a hundred years there will be no progress.

The problem is the trust deficit. That exists between governments and not between peoples. That exists because the armies of both nations are in contention. Only joint defence and operations to wipe out terrorism from the region will remove the trust deficit. There are more victims of terrorism in Pakistan than in India. Prime Minister Mr. Manmohan Singh should bluntly tell Mr. Nawaz Sharif on September 29 that enough is enough. Unless the armies of both nations cooperate there cannot be peace and stability in the region. If even now, when both nations are besieged by terrorism and instability, their governments cannot act rationally, they never will. Without joint defence the trust deficit cannot be removed. If there is joint defence it must inevitably lead to some form of confederation. Both leaders should read the writing on the wall. They should forget what their critics might say today. They should focus on what historians will say tomorrow.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Politicians, Army, playing with fire! Sep

25

      1 Vote

General VK Singh reportedly has decided to file an application with the Right to Information (RTI) commission seeking a copy of General Vinod Bhatia’s secret report on the alleged misuse of the top secret Technical Support Division (TSD) during his tenure as Army Chief. Will the government respond by releasing the secret report? After news of the report appeared in the media the government stated that the report “impinges on matters of national security and, as such, the government will take a decision and further actions after careful examination.” If the contents of the report impinge on national security it is difficult to see how the government can agree to release the report.

However, then a further question is raised. If the report will not be released to the public how was it allowed to be leaked to the media? After the media exposure the government did not deny the report or displayed reticence but went out of its way to acknowledge its contents and resolved to probe the affair. One spokesperson of the Congress party blithely informed TV that since the media had obtained the report the matter had to be fully probed. But the government has not addressed the obvious question of how the media obtained the report. From all accounts it has not ordered an inquiry into who leaked the report and taken steps to punish the guilty. The circumstantial evidence of the government itself leaking the report is compelling. In the pursuit of petty partisan politics was the government oblivious of the grave implications that might flow from the leakage?

That is not all. Politicians further endangered the situation. BJP President Mr. Rajnath Singh defended General VK Singh and charged the UPA government with targeting him because he shared a platform with Mr. Narendra Modi. The Punjab Congress was quick to retaliate. Captain Amarinder Singh reiterated the allegation in the report that General VK Singh had misused TSD to attempt scuttling the appointment of the current Army Chief General Bikram Singh. He challenged Punjab Chief Minister Mr. Prakash Singh Badal to clarify his stand since he was supporting the BJP and Mr. Narendra Modi.

Have India ’s politicians gone stark raving mad? In the pursuit of their stupid and petty rivalries they are creating a situation that could encourage polarization between Hindu and Sikh, between Haryana and Punjab . Whatever the truth of real or imagined differences between army generals, these might be based upon entirely professional grounds. But in public perception the differences could most likely be seen as between communities and states. If such perception is allowed to grow, how will it affect all the ranks in the army?

The TSD unit was conceived and created after the 26/11 terrorist attack in Mumbai. The purpose of this top secret unit was to counter terrorism. Now not only the existence of this top secret unit is blown, but efforts are actually being made to reveal its operations and functioning in order to settle political scores. The most far reaching consequences of this sorry episode might well be General VK Singh rebuttal of the allegations against him publicized by the government. In an interview to Times Now TV channel he furnished damaging details of how the army has been operating in Jammu and Kashmir for the past many decades. His revelations make mockery of India ’s official stand on Kashmir.

One can imagine how gleefully members of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) in China and the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) in Pakistan would be with rapt attention watching the unfolding exposure of the functioning of India’s top secret army unit established to counter terrorism.

Share this:

1 Comment

Posted in Nation

Has Government committed treason? Sep

22

      2 Votes

Not surprisingly the controversy created by the media exposure and its subsequent official confirmation of the alleged misuse of the Technical Services Division (TSD) by former Army Chief General VK Singh is expected to snowball into a major national crisis. But the crisis may not evolve as those who leaked the information might imagine. According to The Indian Express that published the report General Singh had conveyed a warning that if they went ahead and published it “they will get it in the neck”. General Singh reportedly told the Press Trust of India (PTI) news agency that anyone recommending a probe into the functioning of TSD was being nonsensical because its operations were meant to be secret.

General Singh might have enlightened the public a little more. The mere fact that the inquiry into the functioning of TSD was “secret” suggests that the TSD operation was not only secret but probably “top secret”. If that is the case the consequences for the government as well as for media outlets utilized by the government could be very serious. In that event even the existence of TSD should never have been publicized. Further, if there is exposure of the actual working of the top secret unit, leaking information about it may well be considered treasonable under law, regardless of whether infromation is true or false. It involves national security. Such information can help the nation’s enemies. Even knowledge of the existence of TSD can help the nation’s enemies.

Did the government factor this aspect into its calculations before rushing to the media with its leaks? The last on this issue has not been heard. Events thus far may be in fact just the start of a crisis that could traumatize the system.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

President, army and governance! Sep

21

      1 Vote

According to media reports the Defence Ministry constituted a secret Board of Officers body headed by Lt General Vinod Bhatia to probe alleged irregularities committed during the tenure of former Army Chief General VK Singh. It is alleged that General Singh set up a controversial Military Intelligence unit, Technical Services Division (TSD) that misused secret funds to conduct unauthorized covert operations that interfered in domestic politics. According to reports General Bhatia has advised a fuller probe by an external agency like the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The report alleges that TDS misused secret funds in an effort to destabilize the Jammu and Kashmir government, as well as block the promotion of the present Army Chief General Bikram Singh. The media report has furnished details about how these irregularities were sought to be accomplished.

This report was played up as a first page banner in The Indian Express, and appeared as an unobtrusive single column in the inside pages of The Times of India. The Express claims that it tried unsuccessfully to contact General VK Singh but managed to interact through a mutual contact that quoted the General to say that the report was rubbish and the government was motivated by the fact that he had shared a public platform with opposition leader Mr. Narendra Modi. General Bhatia had submitted his report to the Defence Ministry in March this year. This is an amazing episode and offers glaring evidence of how deeply governance and responsibility to preserve national security have sunk. The following questions need to be addressed.

First, now that the report has been quoted in the media it has to be established whether the allegations leveled by General Bhatia’s team of officers are valid. If true it reveals a shocking state of affairs in which a serving Army Chief can so misuse his powers to further political ends unconnected to his call of duty. If untrue, it reveals an equally shocking state of affairs in which politics has infected the armed forces to allow such false and motivated allegations to be made in order to settle differences within the Defence Ministry. Secondly, the report was submitted in March. Why has it surfaced only now almost six months later after the Defence Minister reportedly has got into the act? Does this validate General Singh’s reported comment that he is being targeted only because he shared a public platform with Mr. Narendra Modi? Thirdly, if it be assumed that the report has substance surely there are various discreet methods of addressing the issue, of even indirectly punishing the guilty, and keep the controversy away from public attention?

Transparency in governance is an excellent principle and the media cannot be criticized for playing up the report when offered the chance. But does it behoove a government to throw all considerations of national security to the winds and jeopardize it by publicizing such an episode if indeed it occurred as alleged? What kind of government is ruling India , and what kind of priorities does it have?

Finally, one cannot but reflect once again whether there can ever be accountability in our collapsing democracy unless the President discharges the responsibilities assigned to his post by our Constitution. It is weeks since communal riots exposed the failure of law and order in Uttar Pradesh. Every single party spokesperson has demanded that the government be dismissed. Official spokespersons of the Congress have said that law and order has collapsed. Yet the central government remains a mute spectator although it claims that the rule of law has collapsed in the state. Neither the Prime Minister nor the President has taken a single tiny step to introduce Governor’s rule. The latest episode related to the TSD report has grave implications for the state of affairs in our armed forces as well as for national security. The President as the Supreme Commander of the armed forces is directly responsible to safeguard both. Will he still remain mute?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Modi’s poll campaign error! Sep

19

      Rate This

From all accounts Mr. Narendra Modi’s inaugural campaign rally in Rewari after being anointed Prime Ministerial candidate of the BJP was the largest ever seen in the district. In some of his earlier rallies also common people had flocked to his meetings with great enthusiasm. Obviously, in addition to the formidable publicity and mobilization organized by the RSS and powerful business interests supporting Mr. Modi, certain qualities of his persona too have caught the imagination of the masses. This has been seized by political analysts and his party’s leaders to describe Mr. Modi as the first great national Other Backward Classes (OBC) leader who might become Prime Minister. Media analysts may be forgiven for their ignorance of political ground realities to describe Mr. Modi as a national OBC leader. But surely the poll managers of the BJP ought to have known better?

It is a grievous flaw to describe Mr. Modi as a national OBC icon. Not only are BJP leaders assiduously promoting this image, even Mr. Modi himself seems to have become victim of this flawed propaganda. Mr. Modi belongs to the Ghanchi caste found only in the state of Gujarat . It is a sub-caste in the OBC category. People belonging to the Teli caste in other states may empathize with the Ghanchi caste because of a shared occupational history related to extraction of oil. Otherwise the Ghanchi caste will have little relevance outside Gujarat . Belonging to the Ghanchi caste makes Mr. Modi an OBC leader. It does not make him a national icon of OBC voters. There is no national OBC icon. There cannot be a national OBC icon. There can only be a national icon who is an OBC. The distinction should be appreciated.

The very logic of caste identity runs counter to a nationwide OBC identity. Caste mobilization becomes easy precisely because the approach is tribal. Caste leaders often unite to make common cause. That makes it easy and convenient for the big business corporate sector to use money power to split or align political forces to suit their interest. But when have castes en block voted for a leader belonging to another caste because of his OBC status? Why do not the Kurmis in Bihar vote for Mr. Laloo Yadav, or the Yadavs vote for Mr. Nitish Kumar? Before Mr. Modi became his party’s election campaign chief the BJP had already laid the ground for positive poll results in UP after Mr. Rajnath Singh brought back Mr. Kalyan Singh into his party’s fold. The revived Thakur-Kurmi alliance had earlier brought the BJP its largest ever parliamentry tally of 57 MPs. With Miss Uma Bharati entering UP politics, in addition to her oratory expected to consolidate the Hindutva vote bank, she will also undoubtedly attract Lodh voters belonging to her caste.

Yet media analysts and BJP poll managers are busy trying to exploit Mr. Modi’s OBC status to project him as the first great OBC national leader who might become Prime Minister. Unfortunately, Mr. Modi has bought this flawed approach. Celebrating his birthday recently in Gujarat Mr. Modi reached out and invited many OBC leaders of the organized and unorganized sectors to his function. National thinking has become so corrupted and distorted by the caste reservation policy and mobilization of quick vote banks that an obvious truth escaped media analysts as well as the poll campaign managers of the BJP. If enthusiastic masses have flocked to Mr. Modi’s rallies it is not because he is a national OBC icon. It is because people have recognized that Mr. Modi has risen from very humble origins like themselves to acquire a national political status. If the masses empathize with Mr. Modi it is not because he is an OBC but because he was poor and is now powerful.

The flawed approach adopted by Mr. Modi and the BJP regarding the importance of his OBC status can have very far reaching consequences. It will determine what kind of Indian will emerge tomorrow if Mr. Modi does become Prime Minister. On his birthday Mr. Modi invited OBC leaders belonging to the organized and unorganized sectors of labour. OBC leaders can mobilize votes. That is an understandably attractive attribute. But so can union leaders of organized and unorganized labour mobilize voters. Why could not Mr. Modi have focused on them instead? Does Mr. Modi seek an India of his dreams symbolized by his proposed Statue of Unity to consolidate on the prevalent national divisive culture based upon over 4000 contending castes battling for economic crumbs?

Or does he seek to create a new Indian with a national identity above caste and community ready to confront the 21st century world? Will he support caste-based reservation or economic criteria for job and educational reservation? Will he promote universal compulsory primary education to lift all castes from poverty? These are some questions that Mr. Modi and the leaders of the BJP need to ponder if they seek a genuine political change. They have to decide whether they want victory in the present or a victory for the future. Do they want to cater to India of the present or to India of the future that will belong to the young?

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Modi’s proposed Statue of Unity! Sep

17

      1 Vote

Concluding his first public rally in Rewari after being anointed Prime Ministerial candidate of the BJP, Mr. Narendra Modi appealed to his audience to donate pieces of iron from each village in the state to be used for constructing his proposed Statue of Unity on the sea coast of Gujarat . Mr. Modi wants similar donations of iron pieces from each village in each state across the nation in honour of Sardar Vallabhai Patel who will symbolize unity in the proposed statue. Mr. Modi has declared his intention of constructing the tallest statue in the world, taller than America ’s Statue of Liberty, in honour of Sardar Patel.

This writer has serious objection to the proposal. Sardar Patel was undoubtedly a very great man, as were Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru. Patel performed great service to the nation by unifying the princely states of India after Independence . But though these great leaders did great things for the nation they also committed unforgivable errors the consequence of which continue to haunt our nation. These leaders, mainly Sardar Patel, united Bharat but they divided India . They divided India without the slightest justification. They divided India because they allowed themselves to be influenced and manipulated by the British.

With just over 1000 people killed in Punjab through communal riots engineered by the British administration immediately after Lord Mountbatten became India ’s Viceroy, and about 12000 killed in Bihar and Bengal over a period of two years, these leaders violated their solemn pledge to the people of India by accepting Partition. Gandhi on the fateful day, June 3, 1947 when the Congress formally accepted Partition, conveniently observed his ‘day of silence’. Nehru and Patel were the hawks in the Congress Working Committee in favour of accepting Partition. JB Kripalani, Jayaprakash Narain and Ram Manohar Lohia who opposed Partition were overruled by the rest. On June 2, on eve of the decision, Gandhi assured Mountbatten who visited him that he would not create any hurdles against the decision.

In what manner then might Sardar Patel symbolize unity? After two lawyers from Gujarat, Gandhi and Jinnah, and two aristocrats from Uttar Pradesh, Nehru and Liaquat Ali, butchered and cut asunder Punjab and Bengal displaying their ignorance about the ground realities in these states, people today should display some sensitivity towards the sentiments of provinces where over a million people were slaughtered and over ten million rendered homeless due to the follies of these leaders. In case critics challenge this view about the unforgivable decision about the Partition, let them note that both Gandhi and Nehru acknowledged their error. Gandhi wanted to settle down in Pakistan to undo the Partition just before he was assassinated thanks to ignored security measures during Sardar Patel’s tenure as Home Minister. Nehru sent Sheikh Abdullah to Pakistan to plead with President Ayub Khan to reunite India and Pakistan through a proposed confederation during which effort he died.

Therefore this writer would like to remind Mr. Narendra Modi and many others from different parts of India that they may have their history and may choose to honour whom they wish. The peoples of Punjab and Bengal have their own history and their own memories to recall. Congress leaders today may be the best in the land. They are welcome to govern India . But the Congress Party as Imperial Britain’s instrument to partition India deserves to be buried. Let Congress leaders reinvent themselves into a new organization. After all, this demand merely echoes the last wish of the most revered Congress icon, Mahatma Gandhi, on the day before he died.

Mr. Modi is welcome to construct his Statue of Unity. The people of Punjab and Bengal might seek their own way of responding to history. Human folly can delay but not derail history. Ultimately, cultural nationalism will triumph.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation

Profit & Loss of UP riots! Sep

14

      Rate This

All political parties and media outlets seem agreed that the recent Muzzafarnagar riots which cost 40 lives and brought untold misery to thousands who fled their homes, were the result of a conspiracy. But all seem to disagree about who was behind the conspiracy. The UP government was suspiciously lax in acting on warnings issued by the central government months earlier. Inexplicably it allowed a Jat mahapanchayat of 1.5 lakh people just 20 km from Muzaffarnagar in violation of prohibitory orders in force in the entire district due to prevailing tension. Thousands of vehicles and tractors from Haryana, Delhi and the neighbouring districts of UP were allowed to descend on the venue of the mahapanchayat. One UP minister has acknowledged that there was an administrative lapse. Samajwadi Party (SP) leader Mr. Mulayam Singh was at pains to stress that the riots were not communal but ethnic – between Jats and Muslims. Chief Minister Mr. Akhilesh Yadav has accused other political parties for the conspiracy.

The UP administration has charged that a five minute fake video was used to fan violence. One BJP leader has been arrested in connection with that video. The district administration of Muzafarnagar lodged criminal cases against a senior BJP leader and former minister along with three other BJP leaders for violating the prohibitory order and allegedly delivered provocative speeches during the Jat mahapanchayat. The BJP leaders have denied charges. Leaders of the Bharat Kisan Union (BKU) and the Congress were also charged on similar grounds. Allegations and counter allegations of conspiracy to instigate the riots flew thick and fast between the BJP, SP, Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) and Congress. However, it is futile to speculate who was behind the conspiracy. It is futile to speculate that if there was indeed a conspiracy, whether it was the work of individual politicians or was it sanctioned by their respective political organizations. What can be assessed with some accuracy is the political impact of riots. Which party gained, and which party lost?

The SP is a huge loser. It is likely to lose its Muslim vote which is vital for its electoral success. Had Muzzafarnagar limited itself to communal tension the SP would have gained. That explains the seemingly deliberate administrative dereliction of duty. The Muslims of West UP who supported Mr. Ajit Singh’s Rashtriya Lok DaL (RLD) might have been weaned away to support SP. But things got out of hand. The Jat mahapanchayat was followed by horrendous riots. The government’s failure has left the Muslim community bitter and alienated.

The BSP could be a gainer. The first Muslim priority as of present is to remove this government. In the assembly elections the BSP offers the best chance of doing it. Similarly the Congress could be a gainer. For parliamentary elections the Muslim vote will attempt to block the BJP. On present reckoning the Congress provides the only hope of accomplishing that.

The BJP is the biggest gainer. Notwithstanding Mr. Mulayam Singh’s nitpicking distinction between communal riots and ethnic riots, the accession of the Jat vote to the BJP, along with widespread communal polarization following the riots across the state, could provide a huge boost to BJP prospects.

The RLD is the biggest loser. The traditional harmony between Muslims and Jats carefully nurtured by the late Choudhary Charan Singh rendered West UP a solid base for the RLD. That harmony has been shattered. The cost of this division will be very heavy. It could destroy the dream of carving a new state of Harit Pradesh in West UP. Both the Jats and the Muslims yearned for it. The Muslims are one third of the population in the region. The Deoband centre of religious learning is in the region. The destruction of the fine balance between Jats and Muslims may be irreparable for a long time. Both communities may now repent at leisure.

It is in this cynical way that politicians will calculate the outcome of the Muzzafarnagar riots. They will not spare a thought for the heartrending tragedy befallen to innocent women and children. Their crime was that they belonged to a community. Their weakness was that they were poor. Their tragedy was that they lived in a country where politics is conducted by a cynical, cruel and corrupt class of leaders.

Share this:

1 Comment

Posted in Nation

Modified Modi! Sep

12

      2 Votes

According to media reports the BJP will formally anoint Mr. Narendra Modi as its Prime Ministerial candidate when the party’s parliamentary board meeting is held on Friday. Some time earlier the view had been expressed in these columns that there was no substantive difference between Prime Minister Mr. Manmohan Singh and Mr. Narendra Modi insofar as approach to economic policy was concerned. Both leaders seem to be focused mainly on quick growth based upon foreign investment and delivery of maximum facilities to the big corporate sector.

However, this writer deemed Mr. Modi superior because he was described as a “muscular” version of the Prime Minister. In Gujarat he offered quicker and smoother delivery to big business than the Prime Minister could at the centre. The reason was simple. There was no extra constitutional authority to derail and slow down Mr. Modi in Gujarat as the office of the National Advisory Council did to the Prime Minister in Delhi . The Prime Minister was helpless. He was appointed by Mrs. Sonia Gandhi and had to function under her direction. It was thought that Mr. Modi would have no such fetters to implement the economic model in which the Prime Minister reposed his faith. That view it seems was too hasty. Mr. Modi may in fact be no more muscular than the Prime Minister.

Recent events should leave no doubt that if Mr. Modi is declared as the BJP’s Prime Ministerial candidate it will be only due to the pressure exerted by the RSS on the party. The RSS has appointed Mr. Modi as the party’s Prime Ministerial candidate and left it to the party to announce the decision. Mr. Modi cannot be unaware of the crucial RSS support needed for his elevation. The support reportedly was promised after extended parleys and eventually the decision was taken after agreement was reached on the minimum demands conveyed by the RSS. According to media reports the four conditions set by the RSS for Mr. Modi to receive support were to pledge building a grand Ram Temple in Ayodhya, to enforce the contentious Uniform Civil Code across the country, to repeal of Article 370 in J&K and end the special status of the state, and to press for full protection of cows. All four conditions reflect policies of traditional Hindutva.

However, the merits or otherwise of the policies insisted upon by the RSS are not important. What is significant is that the RSS is insistent upon the implementation of its agenda. Like Mrs. Sonia Gandhi choosing Mr. Manmohan Singh as Prime Minister, the RSS has chosen Mr. Modi as its candidate. But unlike Mrs. Gandhi who established her National Advisory Council to offer policy directives to the government after Mr. Manmohan Singh assumed office, Mr. Mohan Bhagwat has not wasted time. He has already laid down the minimum policy agenda. This is just the start.

Many more policy directives should be expected if Mr. Modi does indeed become Prime Minister. Although Mr. Modi therefore may not prove to be a more muscular version of Mr. Manmohan Singh, constrained as he will be by an extra constitutional body, Mr. Mohan Bhagwat certainly is showing signs of being a much more muscular version of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi. This aspect needs to be considered carefully by all the supporters of Mr. Modi. It should be amply clear that apart from support by members of the public Mr. Modi is heavily backed by the most powerful big business corporate sector. Apart from Mr. Modi’s own undoubted attributes, his popularity depends heavily on the massive support rendered to him by the big business electronic media. There is nothing surprising about that. Big business will protect its own interests. But a serious question arises.

Many supporters of Mr. Modi draw comfort from the fact that he has not personally referred to any of the pro-Hindu policies associated with the hardcore Hindutva elements of the RSS. These supporters are being delusional. They betray their ignorance about how politics is played out. The approval of every action and every statement by any of the sources in the BJP will devolve on Mr. Modi as the election campaign in charge. His silence is meaningless. Silence will be taken as assent. If Mr. Modi disapproves of any policy or statement by members of his party he will have to contradict them publicly to record his dissent. Voters are influenced by whole parties and not by their perception of any one individual, however powerful or charismatic.

What should be clear therefore to all supporters of Mr. Modi, especially the powerful big business elements, is that the RSS agenda must be factored in their calculations. This is because Mr. Modi and RSS will be inseparable if he becomes the Prime Minister. There will be nothing wrong with that if Mr. Modi and the RSS see eye to eye on all policy matters. If on the other hand Mr. Modi’s personal predilection is at variance from the RSS, there could be a very serious problem. In that event Mr. Modi’s government could become as paralyzed as Mr. Manmohan Singh’s government. There would be precisely the same kind of diarchy in governance as paralyzed the UPA government. The paralysis in the UPA government became so palpable that even Congress General Secretary Mr. Digvijay Singh was constrained to acknowledge publicly that the existing system of diarchy was undesirable.

The powerful vested interests favouring Mr. Modi should therefore carefully scrutinize the total RSS agenda in order to continue their support. This applies to all the international big business executives who descended from Europe and South America to endorse Mr. Modi, to all the young Indians who seek a modern twenty-first century nation and look up to Mr. Modi, to all the biggest business houses in the nation who are solidly backing Mr. Modi, and to all the mainstream media TV anchors who swoon with excitement each time Mr. Modi sneezes. It is entirely possible of course that the RSS policies may exceed their wildest dreams of promoting economic growth and progress in India . But that is a prospect it would be more prudent for them to assess now instead of later. What needs to be understood is that either Mr. Modi is totally supportive of RSS policies, or if he is not, there are prospects once again of paralyzing diarchy that could ruin governance in India.

Share this:

Leave a comment

Posted in Nation