The economy, touted as the toast of the world (or at least that part of the world that matters to the articulate, middle class, affluent Indian), is not on a roll anymore it seems. It is no coincidence that social activist Anna Hazare’s campaign targets, and in turn appeals to, this burgeoning section of India that is concerned as much with the decimal points in the GDP growth and the dollar-rupee tango as by the aam aadmi’s railway coach being left behind by the chugging engine of growth. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, in his statement in the Lok Sabha on Wednesday, too directly appealed to this segment of the population, perhaps knowing well its fickleness. Why else would he slip in this paragraph in a speech devoted to Hazare’s campaign: ‘ This middle class beast everyone courts is a strange one. Its prosperity since 1991, when the Pearly Gates to prosperity were thrown open by Finance Minister Manmohan Singh, is accompanied by a gnawing sense of guilt over the ones left behind. It seeks affirmation it is neither responsible for nor unconcerned about the mind-numbing poverty around its towers of wealth. Twenty years later, in a cruel twist of irony combined with fate, the chicken from that liberalisation have come home to roost when its chief architect has been elevated to the post of prime minister. The middle class that benefited from 1991 is very different from the one that existed previously. Then the Indian felt himself to be in a position of disadvantage vis-à-vis the world outside and was happier looking inside. Heck, even But the Indian since then is a different creature. Thanks to the freeing up of controls across the board he has seen the world (if not entirely, at least the parts of it that matter to him), he follows international events across media, and realises that with purchasing power the world is indeed flat. Thanks to his global perspective, or looking outside, it has not taken him long to realise that he has been short-changed, the miasma of prosperity that is around him has lulled him as the elected representatives were on a looting spree. It can be no one’s case, least of all mine, that corruption is an offshoot of 1991. And it certainly is not my case that corruption can be eradicated. It can be contained, yes. So I am all in agreement with Prime Minister Dr Singh when he says there is no magic wand to deal with the issue. The only problem I have with that statement is, just what were you up to, Mr Prime Minister, for seven years in office? Did it need an old man in a not-in-use-anymore Gandhi cap for your government to realise that middle The Congress party, that grand old party of India’s freedom movement spearheaded by Mahatma Gandhi, has moved so far away from the Father of the Nation’s ideals that anyone laying claim to Gandhiji’s legacy strikes terror deep in its heart, petrifying it, rendering it incapable of coherent thought and action. It happened in the mid-1970s when a zephyr called Jayaprakash Narayan turned into the tempest for Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. Against brute State force, Loknayak crystallised the change that Indians then sought: true democracy. With the benefit of hindsight we now know that the Congress could have dealt with him differently, but power often robs you of one critical faculty needed to retain it: clarity of thought. More than a generation has passed since then, and kids who grew up in the shadow of that revolution, probably watching their parents wax eloquent about JP (mine did, for sure), are at the forefront of a new revolution. The Congress government then had unleashed its howitzers against people’s power, and paid the price in the elections that followed. As of Wednesday, there has been little evidence that this Congress government has learnt from history – its leading lights of today all had a ringside view of events as they unfolded then, surely they know better? Critics argue that Hazare is no JP, and they are probably right. But even they cannot deny that a raging conflagration is set off by a trifling spark. Unlike JP’s revolution, Hazare doesn’t enjoy the undivided Opposition’s trust, nor is he a unifying force behind the non-UPA political spectrum. But what he lacks in numbers, Hazare has made up in terms of reach thanks to media, social and otherwise. But Hazare is not the issue, and the government should not make him into one. Rather, it should focus on the issue he has voiced: corruption that is depriving people of the mind-boggling welfare funds but for which You can argue that a mere few thousands are chanting Hazare’s mantra of change, and be right. But ignore it, dismiss it, brush it aside as inconsequential – as this government’s spokespersons have been doing all along, just as they belittled JP all those years ago — and you will be guilty of turning a blind eye to an incendiary spark.
At the best of times
Archive for the ‘Politics’ category
We the feeble
August 17th, 2011Because Shikshan is not a sexy title for a Prakash Jha film
August 17th, 2011Driving past Prateeksha, I saw a posse of policemen guarding actor Amitabh Bachchan’s corner bungalow in Juhu, in anticipation of pro- or anti- reservationists creating trouble. Gosh, I thought, it must be an explosive film. And, any follower of news knows that over the last week there have been many angry voices against the film. Now I don’t know who director Prakash Jha’s PR agent is; whoever it is, the person deserves kudos for the way hype has been created around the film when it clearly doesn’t warrant any of it. Nor does the film warrant a title like Aarakshan, which means reservations. The film is less about reservations and more about education and should rightly have been called Shikshan (education). But will the political class froth at the mouth over such a title? Will the media then cover the film in such great detail? No. Another PR coup, in selecting a sexy title. Ajay Devgan must thank his lucky stars for not having the dates for regular director Jha, leading to Saif Ali Khan stepping in. On paper it must have seen like a stellar role, to play a Dalit which must have seemed novel for the latter given his blue blood, but in reality Saif has little to do in the film. He does an impressive turn in a confrontationist scene with Prateik (when he mouths that Humein mehinat ka paath padha rahe hain aap? dialogue), has a ball bashing up helpless guys in another scene, but on the whole Deepak Kumar the character is unconvincing. He goes missing for a while after taking a rickshaw presumably to the Truth be told, there is only one main character, played by Amitabh Bachchan as the principal Dr Prabhakar Anand, and everyone else is mere extra. As this is a character the thespian has played before, in Mohabattein, it taxes him little. Prateik, who impressed with his naturalness before the camera in Jaane Tu Yaa Jaane Na, seems out of sorts here. But what do you do when your character fades in and out of the script so! Deepika Padukone is no stranger to criticism of her acting prowess, which I always thought was unfair. I mean, how many Hindi films care for the heroine’s theatrics! As Amitabh’s daughter she does what is expected of her through the film, but when given the scene at the end that could shut her critics up, she flubs it badly. Dialogues are meant to be delivered, not spoken, she needs to be told. Manoj Bajpai plays the schemer yet again and does it with relish. Thankfully, he doesn’t have a change of heart at the end which is a relief. Because everyone else does! Saif reveres his principal, changes his mind, and changes his mind yet again. As does Prateik. Deepika walks out on her parents, and once outside has a quick change of heart. Saif goes to Cornell, has a change of heart, and comes back. The board of trustees has a change of heart and sacks their stellar principal. Through all this, one man stands firm, and that is Dr Prabhakar Anand. Everyone around him ultimately see that he was right and they were wrong, and all ends simplistically. On the whole, when a fine bunch of actors don’t impress you as you leave the auditorium, the director has to shoulder the blame. For not having the conviction in seeing the plot through and meandering into the next bylane. Granted, in a fractured society like Don’t the offspring of those who were denied access to education and a life with dignity for generations have a right to overthrow the inhuman yoke and seek their place in the sun? Of course they do. Shouldn’t merit be the ultimate yardstick in a society that is trying to build itself after centuries of subjugation? Of course it should. Alas, And any film that sets out to tackle such a topic needs to be nuanced, which Aarakshan clearly is not. At 20 reels could it have been shorter? Maybe, had it stuck to what it set out to do. The way it is done, Aarakshan feels like two films separated by the recess. After clobbering you with two songs in the first 30 minutes, making you dread if it will turn out to be a musical take on reservations, there’s a drought of songs after that. The Saif-Deepika romance is underdeveloped for fear of overshadowing the main story, which is fine. But their breakup and reunion happen too easily, like the climax which almost makes you guffaw.
Driving down to the preview theatre in the suburbs for a dekko of Prakash Jha’s Aarakshan, I heard on the FM station’s news break that Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mayawati has banned the film for two months in her state. Wow, I thought, must be an explosive film.
Reshuffle reflects PM’s style: subtlety, not noise
January 20th, 2011Social networking sites have their use. They give you a sense of public sentiment over any hot topic. But being majoritarian in nature, the debate often swings the way of those who speak the loudest. Listen to them, but not necessarily to take them as the vox populi.
If you don’t do that, on hearing the internet chatter you will tend to believe that the United Progressive Alliance government is rudderless, even clueless that it is rudderless, and lacks a strategy — all of which is proven by the reshuffle, inasmuch as that word applies to Wednesday’s portfolio reallocation exercise by the prime minister.
It can be no one’s case that UPA II is going about its task bright as a button, and it certainly isn’t mine either. The thumb of rule for governments is that their honeymoon phase lasts for one or two years, after which it descends into a holding operation till the next election is called or forced on it. The UPA II is unique in that it almost never had a honeymoon period with the electorate – which is a tragedy, considering the enormous goodwill that propelled it into office.
To know a government is to know its political compulsions. To know a cabinet shakeup is to know the prime minister.
We have known the UPA II for one and a half years now, and its political compulsions were sought to be given a sheen recently by Rahul Gandhi, the Congress general secretary who is anything but that. Coalition governments have their limitations, he said, in a sorry attempt at deflection of the all-round criticism UPA II has been subject to. For instance, following the Supreme Court’s observations on various issues involving the government, which have become a sort of a daily sermon, are an eye-opener. Never before has a government in India been lectured and harangued by the apex court in so regular a manner, which makes you wonder, just who is in charge?
That, in my opinion, is the problem behind UPA II. Things were okay with UPA I, because it was a surprise victory even for the Congress. The prime minister and his political superior, Congress president Sonia Gandhi, hit upon a modus vivendi that didn’t cut too much into each other’s space. So while he could focus on governance, she could focus on the party.
But things seem to have changed with the 2009 electoral victory. The Congress, surprise surprise, improved on its previous Lok Sabha tally, and the party bosses suddenly seem to have woken up to the fact that maybe, just maybe, it could improve further and reach a position where it would form the government on its own.
Inherent in that belief is that it would see the return of the Gandhi family to the top political job in the country.
The problems of UPA II, then, stem from the classic case of party vs government. It was all hunky-dory when the party had less numbers and therefore was less assertive. This doesn’t apply only to the government — it applies in equal measure to the Congress’s relations with its allies too. Hence the uneasy equations with its various partners, from the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam to the Nationalist Congress Party to the Trinamool Congress.
Indira Gandhi foresaw this and wore two hats, of prime minister and party president. So far Sonia Gandhi has resisted the impulse, choosing to be the power behind the throne instead. The irony cannot escape her, the prime minister or us: power can have only one source. When there are more, as it does now, it causes confusion at best and demoralisation at worst.
And the UPA II is at its worst phase now. If it does well, Sonia Gandhi gets the credit; if it fails, it will be laid at Manmohan Singh’s door. The soft-spoken prime minister was aware of this when he agreed to take up the job which had no other claimant. And Wednesday’s reallocation of portfolio reflects his style of operation.
I am not one of those fortunate enough to be on familiar terms with the prime minister or his office, that’s a privilege reserved for a few for whom the downside was revealed recently in tapped telephone conversations. I have encountered the incumbent only twice, both on overseas visits he made. During these visits, contrary to public perception that the media gets to wine and dine with the high and mighty, all you get are a few minutes of interacting up close with the prime minister.
But these are precious minutes, where you get to observe, and even confirm your perceptions. From what I believe and know, this prime minister is not given to pomp and show — not because he knows his job was given to him — but because that is simply not his style. So no overt displays of either style, or authority. Why use a howitzer when a kirpan is enough, that could easily be his motto.
So all those castigating the government for a feeble reshuffle are missing the point. Which is that the exercise was not meant to be anything more than a message. And the recipients for whom it was intended, have all got it. Just a few examples will suffice:
Sharad Pawar has retained agriculture, but has lost the crucial civil supplies ministry. Plus, his foe Vilasrao Deshmukh is now in his trajectory with rural development portfolio.
His party colleague Praful Patel has been given a leg up, but only after paying the price: civil aviation.
Kamal Nath has been moved out of highways to urban development.
Murli Deora gives up petroleum, gains corporate affairs.
MS Gill loses sports, turns number cruncher with statistics and programme implementation.
The Congress party’s interests have been kept in mind, too, with Sriprakash Jaiswal and Salman Khursheed, both from Uttar Pradesh, getting promoted to Cabinet rank.
You can always ask why did the prime minister not go the whole hog if his intention was to clean up his administration? Why have laggards and looters been allowed to remain?
It is for those who refuse to read the signs that Manmohan Singh issued a statement later that a more expansive exercise will be done after the Budget session of Parliament.
Why after the Budget session?
For the government, clearly, the first imperative is to tide over that period – already facing the combined Opposition ire and the threat of Jagan Reddy’s MPs pulling out and endangering the government, neither wisdom nor survival instinct advise the opening of a third front of disgruntled ministers by sacking them.
This, to me, fits in with the prime minister’s style. Another leader from another era I think said it better: Speak softly and carry a big stick. That’s what I think Dr Singh has done.
2010: A mandate betrayed
December 28th, 2010
As an ancient civilization that has seen vicissitudes go by with equanimity,
As India has hobbled along these last 63 years trying to keep its long overdue tryst with destiny, there have been times more often than one can remember when the promise has been betrayed by a class that pretends to serve but in reality is only self-serving.
So it is that even the most hardened optimists — like this writer — will always qualify their rosy outlook for India with the words, ‘But, then, you never know…’ – only because we know that since time immemorial the curse of this land has been its men of destiny who have repeatedly let it down.
But not even hardened experience could have prepared one for the slide in 2010 where a government that assumed power a year ago on the back of a mandate of hope has simply squandered away its reservoir of goodwill and betrayed the mass of expectations which fuelled it to power.
After all, this was supposed to be a government of the aam-aadmi. But the unfolding scams during the year, involving sums that simply boggle the mind, show yet again that when it comes to decisions the common man’s interest is not at the core of decision-making.
Every government has its quota of scams, some artificial, some inflated, and some true. What separates the good government from the bad is how it reacts when scams break, what counter-actions it takes to punish the guilty, to recover the loss to the nation and to put in measures to prevent a repetition in future. Anything less would be seen as being complicit in the financial skullduggery.
Alas, judging by this yardstick, the Manmohan Singh government has failed, and failed miserably. Consider the two humongous scams to hit the headlines during the year: the Commonwealth Games, and the 2G spectrum allocation. In both cases, the government first pretended the scam did not exist, then denied the extent of the scam, before ordering a probe that satisfied very few. Even now, it seems more set on silencing the Opposition’s furore than on bringing the guilty to book.
Naturally, the opposition parties from both sides of the political spectrum, the Bharatiya Janata Party and the Left parties, in an unprecedented act paralysed Parliament’s winter session with their demand for setting up a joint parliamentary committee probe into the 2G spectrum scam, a demand the government is loath to concede for reasons of its own, despite the prime minister likening himself to “Caesar’s wife”.
The irony could not have been starker. In the last six months of the year, leaders of the P5 nations — the
Yet, even as a new
That Indians have an ambivalent attitude towards corruption, is a given. We do not mind winking at it if we felt the government was also doing our work. The CWG and 2G spectrum scams have shattered this delusional sense of security. Both the Games and the spectrum scams involved aspects that didn’t touch the aam aadmi’s life. The former was about showcasing India’s arrival on the world stage by hosting its biggest international extravaganza to date, while the latter involved — simply put — selling of airwaves.
The widespread dismay is that while the aam aadmi was being passed off with homilies about lack of resources to elevate his life from the miserable to the tolerable, millions of rupees were seen to be siphoned off by the political class, with no one punished till the final week of the year. It is a conspiracy of silence where self-preservation is the need of the hour.
That this should happen on the watch of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Congress president Sonia Gandhi, whose working combination seems to have struck a chord with the public – if you drown out the negative chorus on Twitter – is, in my opinion, the biggest disappointment of the year for those praying for a new dawn.
Sadly, when it comes to tackling the cancer eating into the vitals of the nation, the couple seems hamstrung. Speeches pour forth, condemnations are issued, but there are no worthwhile explanations coming about why nothing was done when the exchequer was actually being bled.
It could well have been this waffling over corruption that sent the aam aadmi away from the Congress party by the droves in the Bihar assembly election and into the arms of Nitish Kumar, a man who doesn’t merely stop at issuing homilies about zero tolerance for corruption but who lives by his word, realizing that it is not enough to personally incorruptible but also provide a corruption-free administration in order to make a difference.
It is a lesson the Congress party will do well to internalize, for as Bihar is to India what India is to the world: a land of glorious past belied by a miserable present which holds it back from its rightful future.
Instead, the Congress party and its government are unable to break free of the shackles of the past. Under attack over corruption, it has preferred to divert attention to bogeys from yore that are best buried and forgotten. It could have taken its cue from the
Clearly, this is a winter of discontent whose icy fingers are seeping through the warm coverlet of positive sentiment. With critical state assembly elections due next year – including in bellwether states like Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and
What the Indian Mujahideen mail said
December 8th, 2010This will haunt your nation of world’s ‘Greatest DemoNcracy’ until Muslims are paid back justly and fairly for the loss of their beloved Babri Masjid, the precious lives of their near and dear ones, their pride, dignity and self-respect.
Once a masjid is erected, it always remains a masjid and the ‘property’ of Allah until the last day. It cannot return to being the property of any person or community even those who may have paid for establishing it. Neither above it nor below it on any floor can be used for anything but as a masjid. Hence, all rulings that apply to a masjid will now apply to the exact same area directly below it on each of the lower floors (including the basement); and likewise on all floors above it because it is a masjid to the peaks of the heavens and likewise to the recesses of the earth below.
O Muslims! For the sake of Allah STOP trusting the Taghut Judiciary and the Taghut Parliament and mend ways to ‘please’ Allah alone. Technically speaking even the so- called ‘supreme court’ stands inefficient against legislations approved on the floor of the House. It needs no mention that time and again the Congress party with its hidden agenda has shown its true colors.
Be it the inaction over the planting of the idol in 1949 or the shilanyaas, the ground-breaking ceremony of 1989 and finally the demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992. For all practical reasons the masjid site has since been transformed into a mandir, thanks to the Supreme Court order to maintain status-quo. The Allahabad high court’s verdict of ‘Aastha over Facts’ is exemplary of the bias judiciary although Ram is purely a mythical figure.
The Supreme Court, the high courts, the lower courts and all the commissions have utterly failed to play an impartial role regarding Muslim issues. Narendra Modi, who presided over the 2002 massacres of Muslims in Gujarat, is given a clean chit whereas the victims still run from pillar to post for justice. Even the ’92 Mumbai culprits roam freely and enjoy government security. All the anti-Muslim pre-planned riots, arson, rapes, losses of lives and properties are still awaiting justice. The list is endless!
O Muslims! We hereby declare that even if all the ulema, scholars and Muslim leaders collectively deviate from or refuse Allah and Prophet’s Verdict, their decision will be right beneath our feet. Ultimately, Allah is Most Supreme. Any argument against the Quran and Sahih Hadith is totally unacceptable to us. Neither the All India Muslim Personal Law Board nor the Babri Masjid Action Committee nor the Sunni Waqf Board nor any litigant has any right to alter or compromise on any of these aspects whatsoever regarding the Babri Masjid. All sorts of bartering and bargaining is totally unacceptable to Allah and thus to the Muslims.
Our Ulema ought to be those who fear Allah the most as they are the most knowledgeable but today it seems inversely true. They were to be more responsible and be at the forefront like the Huffaaz (Quran scholars) companions of Prophet, several of whom were martyred in the cause of Allah. They never sat back and were never content with giving lectures alone dying to join the good books of the Kuffar. It won’t be surprising if most scholars of our times fill the Hellfire. We urge those ulema to behave sensibly, change their attitude towards this Holy Cause, fear Allah alone, come forward, inspire and motivate the people and thus appease none but Allah alone.
We are fully aware of your preparations at the Babri Masjid site for the construction of a ‘grand temple’ over the corpses of our martyrs all over the country. The Indian Mujahideen warn these filthy Hindu zealots that even if a Grand Temple of Gold is built over the Babri Masjid we will destroy it at all costs. Remember! It was a Masjid, It is a Masjid and It will always remain a Masjid.
At this juncture Muslims are silent due to their state of affairs. We hereby invite all our Muslim brethren to never be weak-hearted over the designs of these idolators and urge them to strengthen their faith in Allah and unite for the cause of Islam. Surely, victory is awaiting us, InshaAllah. Our memories are still fresh and our hearts still bleeding over every Muslim brother and sister who was hacked to death after the demolition of Babri masjid. Indian history is decorated with countless state-sponsored terror and state-managed riots. Shaheed kii jo maut hai wo qaum ki hayaat hai. Indeed every martyr enlivens the ummah. By Allah!
We will not budge until every inch of the Masjid is regained and lives of our martyrs avenged. By the grace of Allah we will strike terror in the hearts and minds of these idol worshippers until the mountain of injustice is undone. InshaAllah, we will leave no stone unturned come what may till the anger of believer’s hearts is removed and a Magnificent Masjid is built at the same spot. We have now achieved skills to teach Newtons’ 3rd law in ‘their own’ terms. Our youth have all reasons to be proud and pompous to shoulder our responsibilities towards the Ummah, while our elderly can be content. Alhamdulillah! We seek their Duas and supplications for our cause.
If you continue with these ‘injustices’ then we promise that we will continue our war against you. In the name of Allah we are preparing for you since years and we will continue on this path. Hope you will appreciate and relish this deadly slap in your face for the reason that our brothers, sisters, elderly and kids have been subjugated to piles of humiliation at your hands. Remember they were also someone’s father and someone’s mother and also someone’s child.
Silence is not always golden, Mr Prime Minister
November 19th, 2010
One of the enduring memories of the Diwali weekend visit by the planet’s most powerful man – second most powerful, if you go by the recent Forbes ranking – to Mumbai was his interaction with college students at St Xaviers college, where he fielded diverse, and uncomfortable, questions. Questions ranging from what jihad meant to him to
The answers may not have satisfied everyone, but by opening himself to questions Obama won hearts and minds in an information-starved
Watching him open-mouthed, I realised that he opened up because of two possibilities. One, he had nothing to hide, or two, he did but was willing to brazen it out. The jury may be out on where Obama fits in, but my point is that it’s only those who have things to hide, who don’t have answers to uncomfortable questions, take refuge in silence and non-cummunication.
Unfortunately, a leader who communicates is not an image that sits well in
Media conferences happen may once in a while, but a Town Hall kind of meeting that Obama addressed, where the citizens’ concerns are directly addressed? If you rule out the ubiquitous election meetings the answer is, never.
Why is it that in this age of exploding communication, our leaders, regardless of age and ideology, shy away from communicating to the people who elect them? Why this unwillingness to be subject to some grilling by the people who voted you into office?
Could it be that our political leaders believe that once the votes are cast, the master-servant equation that powers the democratic machinery changes forever, till the next time the votes need to be canvassed?
It could be that most of our politicians belong to an era when communication only meant writing letters, making a speech and issuing press releases. The man who as finance minister ushered economic revolution in the country, has failed to realise that concomitant to his reforms is the explosion in media we see all around us, which have erased the distance between the ruler and the ruled, thanks to instant communication courtesy the internet.
To the undiscerning eye, the ensuing cacophony may seem like a media circus, but the true communicator – like Obama – would harness this favourably.
The counterpoint can be imagined: Ah, but the internet and such are a young man’s playthings, you don’t expect eminence grise to get online and chat, do you?
Which can be rebuffed with a quick: But what’s age got to do with anything, dude! The internet is just a medium. The print was yesterday’s, television is today’s and the internet is the medium of tomorrow. What matters is how effectively you use it.
Hugo Chavez is all of 56 years young, one doesn’t hear him cribbing about technology or new media as he engages with his constituents on Twitter. Or for that matter the venerable Fidel Castro, who engages a team to tweet for him. Only part of their reason could be to appear ‘cool’ and ‘with it’; mostly it is done out of their desire to get their message across.
Our own B S Yeddyurappa is no spring chicken, but thanks to twitter I knew this afternoon that the embattled Karnataka chief minister who is facing corruption charges has ‘ordered a judicial probe by a retired Supreme Court judge into all land deals, in and around
I wish I knew, similarly, as a citizen and not a journalist, what our prime minister thought of the various issues dogging his government, of which there are plenty.
I wish someone would tell him, and the rest of the political establishment, that communication is the hallmark of a true leader. All the legendary leaders were skillful communicators who used the tools of the day to get their point across – to the people, not to a privileged junta.
And going by the silence from 7,
Really, did things have to come to such a sorry pass where the prime minister, for the first time ever, has to explain his silence/inaction to the top court in the land? Even Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, who was directly accused of involvement in the Bofors scam but which was never proved, did not face such a situation. Nor did P V Narasimha Rao, believed by many (not me) to have presided over the most corrupt government in independent
Not even his political opponents suspect Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to be corrupt. Nor does anyone doubt that Dr Singh is a good man who has the nation’s wellbeing at heart. But often, a good man’s silence has the potential to cause more harm than a bad man’s deeds, and we have know this from the ancient legends of this land.
There are so many questions that Dr Singh can address, and here’s a sparse sample: Why, despite the widespread knowledge that Andimuthu Raja’s actions as telecom minister would cause a humongous loss to the exchequer, was he persisted with? Why were his dubious actions not annulled and his orders reversed? Why did it take so long for Raja to be sacked from the cabinet?
If what we learnt in our civic lessons years ago, that in a democracy the people are supreme, is true, why is the prime minister rushing to answer the Supreme Court and not the people whose mandate made his government? Couldn’t he have avoided the embarrassment by being more open and direct with the people in the first place?
And, there is a lesson in this sorry episode for all future, budding politicians. The point is, will they learn it?
The onus for closure is on Advani
October 6th, 2010
Among the various utterances following the
It was put out by Press Trust of India, and was an interview with Bharatiya Janata Party’s Bhishma Pitamah (the grand patriarch) — so described by the Congress party’s
Judicial verdicts are strange things, you can take away what you like from them. So we have sections of the Muslim community nursing a grievance that the verdict was an instance of majoritarianism and that it actually justified the Babri masjid’s demolition in 1992 by a horde of Hindu lumpen even as the BJP’s leading lights, including Advani, stood by watching helplessly.
The fact is that the verdict went by centuries of belief that the Ram Janmasthan lay at the spot in dispute, one fails to understand Advani’s takeaway that it justified his rath yatra – if anything, the mosque’s demolition was the direct outcome of Advani’s yatra. What Advani and his party the BJP did in the 1990s was to crassly exploit the temple to be propelled to power in
Politicians have a short memory span, we all know that, which helps them to forget what they told the electorate. But since Advani has claimed his rath yatra has now been justified by the court, let us recall what exactly that
I had been to a couple of the meetings that Advani addressed in the 1990s, and I know the meetings were filled with anti-Muslim venom. No, Mr Advani didn’t utter any of that, but the organisational apparatus that surrounded his rath yatra and whose members would keep the public enthralled till he turned up, showed no restraint whatsoever.
The kind of sentiments expressed, the words that were used to describe Muslims, are not fit for publication, or worthy of recall. And I refuse to believe that the shrewd Advani did not know what was being said, by who and where.
Heck, what was being projected was a us versus them sentiment. There was only outcome possible from there, the masjid will go.
It was all the more shocking because it was apparently being said in the name of Hinduism, to defend Hinduism, and to reclaim Hinduism’s lost glory.
Heaven knows that Hinduism didn’t need any hammer and pickaxe wielding defenders as had assembled at the Babri Masjid site on
But Advani had seen the political windfall Lord Ram had given his party which, till recently, had been in ICCU. The party was on a roll, the Congress had lost its Gandhi mascot to a Tamil Tiger suicide squad and the time was ripe for the BJP to fill the vacuum.
In the end, the end – political power — justified Advani’s means. Today he may turn his back on the temple movement, try to play the elder statesman, but the cold fact is that his rath yatra was directly responsible for the masjid’s fall.
Blithely, he had claimed, that the assembled kar sevaks could be controlled.
Blithely, he later claimed too that the day of the mosque’s demolition was the saddest day of his life.
If at all it was the saddest day in anyone’s life, it was the average Hindu’s in whose name the deed was perpetrated.
For it was in his name that the chariot of ire had rolled across the country spreading venom and vitriol against Muslims.
It was in his name that the mosque was felled by lumpen under Advani’s gaze.
Advani reminds me of Bhishma Pitamah too, but not as the grand patriarch of a political formation.
The venerable Bhishma it was who kept his silence in Duryodhana’s court as the Pandavas were dispossessed of everything they owned, including their wife. His sage counsel could have averted the disaster to follow, Krishna Dwaipayan Vedvyasa tells us he didn’t.
The erudite Bhishma could have got the Kauravas to see reason, to avert bloodshed in the war with their cousins, but he didn’t.
And ultimately the great warrior met his inglorious end at the hands of a eunuch, as it was foretold.
Advani reminds me of Bhishma Pitamah for his eloquent silence at a critical time.
For 18 years the demolition case has been dragging on and for 18 years Advani has been mocking the due process of law. Section 107 of the Indian Penal Code is very clear on incitement when it says:Whoever, either prior to or at the time of the commission of an act, does anything in order to facilitate the commission of that act, and thereby facilitates the commission thereof, is said to aid the doing of that act.
For 18 years Advani has convinced himself that he played no role in the mosque’s demolition, without realising his role as inciter of the lumpen– thanks to sophistry.
Sure, Advani did not wield a hammer himself — but if he claims that with thousands of blood-thirsty kar sevaks gathered there on his call, and given the fever pitch he had raised the temple issue to, he really expected the mobs to go home after conducting a peaceful puja never mind the hammers and such they were wielding, I dread to think that such a simple man had occupied the second most important job in the country. For five full years, mind.
What the
The court verdict, far from legitimising the deeply divisive rath yatra he set out on, has tried repair the damage he did to inter-community relations in
But repair cannot happen unless the chief architect of the masjid’s demolition steps up. Reconciliation cannot happen unless Advani wills it. As the person who breathed life into the movement, only he can give a quietus to it.
He could start by owning up his direct role in inciting the mobs to assemble at Ayodhya on
Otherwise, like Bhishma Pitamah’s inaction at crucial times in the Mahabharata, Advani’s too will have disastrous consequences.
My I-Day take: New India, old politics
August 14th, 2010
For someone returning to
The change is reflected not just in the glittering towers, the sweeping reach of white goods once considered luxuries, automobiles on the road, in the glitz and glamour dished out by the largest film industry in the world.
There is a new India in the mindsets as well, one that doesn’t want anything to do with the old shibboleths, or yesterday’s dogmas, or to walk the trodden path – witnessed in the diverse educational options, the radical career choices. It is an
As sector after sector recasts its rules to adjust to this new reality, of a bold and young India, one group seems to have not heard the bugle call of change. The tragedy is, this group is at the head of the table.
Three recent events show up the chasm between the leaders and the people they claim to represent.
With few weeks remaining for the Commonwealth Games, the largest sporting spectacle that India has ever hosted, you will expect a media carpetbombing on the world-class facilities, the grandeur of the stadiums, the awe-inspiring infrastructure etc.
Instead, what we have been seeing are mind-numbing instances of financial malfeasance, official complicity, and brazenness in the face of exposure.
With thousands of crores of rupees allotted for the Games, we are not talking of small change but of amounts big enough to change
What has been drowned out in the charges over filthy lucre is the focus on
And the scam cuts across party lines, so even as various political parties go hammer and tongs at the government in Parliament over the shocking allegations of complicity, everyone knows that it is all part of political posturing and nothing has changed. Nor will anything change.
After all, this script has played out so many times in the past by different political parties, when
Fattening on the common weal is not the only thing that is unchanged about
The media interaction at the end of resumed foreign minister-level talks, suspended by a miffed
As SM Qureshi ticked off Indian Home Secretary GK Pillai over naming ISI as the mastermind of the Mumbai terror attacks and equated him to terrorist Hafeez Saeed, did
South Block, which houses the ministry of external affairs, could well take a few tips from the Men in Blue on how to overcome the Pakistani bogey. Mahendra Singh Dhoni’s team, after all, is a fitting metaphor for the new
But nothing represents the persistence of Old India-style politics in the face of failure as does
As a restive populace in the border state picks up stones to beat the
More than any other challenge,
In the two years he has been in office – but very little of it in power – things sure changed, but for the worse. Abdullah Jr has no idea of either the problem or the solution, and he comes off only slightly better than the other great hope in the valley, Mehbooba Mufti, and that by virtue of pledging his troth to
As the stone-pelters and the men in uniform and khadi stare each other down, what is on balance is the future of
Can we move on from Pakistan, Mr Prime Minister?
July 16th, 2010Every ruler of men and minds since time immemorial has longed to leave his legacy behind — some through grandiose physical ones like the Taj Mahal or the pyramids; some leave behind a revolutionary thought, a philosophy, like
The exceptions are rare, almost non-existent. I was reading Michel Danino’s riveting book The Lost River, on the Saraswati which was the cradle of the civilisation posterity has exclusively credited to the Sindhu/Indus, and was amazed to find that the remains have no pointer to the ruler/s. No grand places. No temples. No monuments. Nothing. Just urban conglomerations. In fact, early English excavators with their Egyptian and Roman background even dismissed the archaeological findings as unspectacular. Who ran the vast swathe of settlements on the banks of the Saraswati whose impeccable urban order we are unable to replicate 5000 years later in our cities? We don’t know because the rulers didn’t think that was important.
If only our modern rulers thought along those lines, better would be our lot. Instead they choose to run after a legacy, making a grand statement, little realising that legacy is what happens when you do your job well. So we’ve had prime minister after prime minister tilting at the scales, chasing a dream. Nehru may have wanted to be known as the champion of global peace and India-China brotherhood but we best remember him as the architect of the modern nation-State; Indira Gandhi may have wanted to better her father, but we remember her for creating Bangladesh, imposing Emergency and Operation Bluestar; with her son it was a case of what could have been rather than what he did or did not do.
P V Narasimha Rao, for instance, did not set out to leave a legacy when he liberalised the economy, he just didn’t have a choice given what profligate governments before him had done. In fact, despite his vast intellectual superiority, I don’t think even he could have foreseen how his decision would unleash a dormant nation. Today, his party may demonise him for the Babri masjid demolition but no one can take away what he did to the Indian spirit in 1991.
Similarly, A B Vajpayee did not set out to leave a legacy when he detonated the bomb in 1998. But by staring down the international pressure that followed, he gave his people tremendous self-belief. And when he stepped down in 2004, we knew for the first time that non-Congress governments can run the nation better. That was his legacy.
Neither Rao nor Vajpayee strove to be remembered – they did what they had to do, and when it is consonance with the national spirit, as it was for them, legacy was created.
Manmohan Singh, finance minister to Rao in 1991, obviously doesn’t think the economic liberalisation was his legacy, so when he got the unexpected chance in 2004 to be remembered by posterity he grabbed it with both hands. The Indo-US nuclear deal may have been the culmination of what Vajpayee’s government had done in the previous term, but Dr Singh left his mark by staking his government’s future for
The War on Terror may have gone wrong and
In his second term, when he is running after another legacy – something that’s never been done before – he is being not just greedy but even stands to lose it all. Perhaps he needs to be told that peace with
Plus, if you remove the Wagah border brigade and the peaceniks who come alive every now and then, there is no groundswell within
Dr Singh’s own Congress party, with its elephantine memory, knows it and hence its lukewarm response to the prime minister’s ambition.
His own ministers know it.
When it comes to peace with
I wish somebody would tell the prime minister that peace with
For the present, the people are not enthused by peace with
Things could be different if those extending the hand of friendship in
One is the civilian one we see, where elections are held, the president, prime minister and others are selected and who run the nation for all practical purposes.
The second nation is the real one, it is the one that calls the shots on critical issues – and
Dr Singh can deal with them till the cows, bulls and every animal on Noah’s Ark come home but each time he will realise that it’s always back to square one. Hopefully someday soon he will outgrow his magnificent obsession.
There’s a nation full of problems waiting for that day.
Sri Sri? Shiva Shiva!
June 2nd, 2010It was, by all accounts, a stray bullet, but one that has ricocheted through the Art of Living bio-system. Was it meant for the popular founder, Sri Sri Ravishanker, as the guru and his band of followers believe, or otherwise, as almost everyone else believes, including Home Minister P Chidambaram?
As of now the only point of certainty is that a bullet was fired. Not by who, at who, when, how, from where, why.
Considering that the police are nowhere near knowing, leave alone apprehending, whoever fired that shot even three days after the incident, it’s safe to assume that this will join the long ranks of unsolved cases.
I have been to the ashram outside Bengaluru, interviewed the guru, and attended the evening satsang there, and agree with Sri Sri that the assailant needs to attend the satsang to get rid of his negative feelings. It’s a wonderful feeling to be part of it.
Having said that, what I don’t agree with is the chorus from various sections pointing to the dangers that our religious leaders face and for the State to provide them with security.
I am dead against such a move.
The primary reason for my resistance – much as I respect religious leaders of various persuasions whose contribution to the wellbeing of a spiritual nation like ours cannot be discounted – is that a secular nation has no business to get entangled in matters religious. That the State already is entangled, in various forms and guises, is not the issue. Should we sink deeper into the mess, since anyway we are already knee-deep in it, as some seem to suggest? I think not.
The other point is, given the multitude of religious leaders in
Finally, who is going to pay for this security of a million gurus/teachers/whoever? Should you and I be subsidising it through the tax we pay, never mind we may be atheists and abhor all things religious and divine? A few gurus – most, actually – may be able to pay for the security themselves, but what about the vast many who cannot?
Considering the landmines on this path, I think the State should not even entertain thoughts of providing security to the religious leaders – after all, if, as religions say and the gurus teach, God created life and He alone has the right to take it, why should a secular State be concerned with something that is beyond its jurisdiction!
