All posts by admin
Posted on 03 February, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
Is the Third Front back? Who exactly is pushing the idea of the Third Front? What are its implications? The prime movers behind the idea of Third Front are the Janata Dal (United) and the Samajwadi Party. Both are facing a serious identity crisis. The JD(United) broke a long standing alliance with the BJP and faces the possibility of being squeezed out in the Lok Sabha elections. The party is essentially confined to Bihar. Its leaders took a calculated risk and had hoped that Lalu Prasad Yadav would be in prison and the minority vote would shift to them. The bail granted to the RJD leader destroyed the JD(U)’s calculations. The SP in the Uttar Pradesh is responsible for keeping both the UPA-I and UPA-II in power. On all crucial occasions it helped the UPA. The quid-pro-quo was help from the CBI for weakening the corruption cases registered against its top leaders and their family members. It is extremely difficult for the Samajwadi Party to project a credible political personality on the plank of non-Congressism. Its political strategy is always based on two vote banks—the Yadavs and the Muslims. The first is also partly voting for Narendra Modi and the second is completely disillusioned after the Muzaffarnagar riots. Both the JD(U) and the SP are potential losers in their areas of influence. Losers don’t become winners merely because they attempt to form a ‘losers front’.
The essential requisite of a Third front is equidistance from the Congress and the BJP. How can the JD(U) and the Samajwadi Party claim that? The JD(U) lost out to the RJD in a bid to befriend the Congress. The SP kept the UPA in power for Ten years.
Then, of course, there are regional parties in some States. These regional parties have a support base of their own. Within their States they are likely to win a reasonable number of Lok Sabha seats. These regional parties occupy the non-Congress space. They have in the past been identified with the NDA. Their politics can never be one of alignment with the Congress. That will dilute their political identity. The Congress, in any case, does not appear to be heading for a position where it can occupy the centre stage of a credible political alliance. It can at best be a fringe player not a formidable part.
There are the contradictions of the Third Front – the Trinamool Congress versus the Left, the SP versus the BSP, the AIADMK versus the DMK and the JD(U) versus the RJD. They constitute a political paradox which a Third Front can never resolve. The Third Front has no ideological coherence. It has no nucleus with a large political presence which can provide stability to the Front.
The disillusionment with the Congress-led UPA is clearly visible. To pull the economy out of the present mess, you need coherence, decisiveness and political stability. The Third Front represents the very opposite of all these. The more noise we hear about the Third Front, the greater will be the desire to elect Narendra Modi led NDA government which has an ability of its own to form a government.
Posted on 02 February, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
The revelation in ‘The Indian Express’ with regard to the Augusta Westland VVIP helicopter deal appears to be a repeat of what we witnessed in the late 1980s. Martin Ardbo’s diary was seized. He was head of the company which manufactured the Bofors Gun. Amongst various disclosures, the diary hinted at the protection of ‘Q’. Keen observers all knew who this ‘Q’ could be. In 1993, the Swiss authorities gave details of the bank accounts into which the Bofors kick-backs were paid. The beneficiary of one of the accounts into which significant sums had been deposited indeed was the well known ‘Q’. ‘Q’ was allowed to escape from India and the rest is history.
Admittedly, kick-backs have been paid in the VVIP helicopter transaction. The defensive UPA Government has cancelled the deal. The Indian Express in the first instance points out as to who calls the shots in the decision making in the Government of India. Even the Italian middlemen perceived that important decisions in India were being influenced by Mrs. Sonia Gandhi. The Prime Minister at best is one of the several advisors to her. The middlemen are clever people. They do their home work before coming to conclusions. The abbreviated initials mentioned on the account sheets remind me of Martin Ardbo’s diary.
Mrs. Sonia Gandhi should indeed be worried. How is Government of India perceived by people in India and outside? Is it a Government of gold diggers? Has the UPA which she heads subverted India into a kleptocracy? Is the Government which she controls a filth machine? The government indeed has a very corrupt image. Its performance on the economic front has been disturbing. The final data of 2012-13 have scaled down the GDP growth to 4.5 percent. UPA-II’s economic achievements, to borrow Mr. Chidambaram’s phrase, can be written on the back of a postal stamp. Recent election results presented a disturbing picture for the ruling combine. The leader that they have sought to project for 2014 General Elections is failing to make an impact.
Faced with these adversities, the UPA Chairperson resorts to the last refuge of the desperate. Her ‘poison cultivation’ remark is only intended to communally polarize an election which is otherwise being contested on a developmental agenda. Her desperation is understandable. It is a different matter that her attempt to communally polarize the election may yield no results.
Posted on 01 February, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
The proposal for creation of a separate state of Telengana will now be coming up before the Parliament. The BJP has consistently supported the proposal to create a state of Telengana. At the same time, we believe that justice should be done to the region of Seemandhra.
The manner in which the Congress Party has gone about on this issue displays a complete lack of statecraft. In the year 2000 the NDA government headed by Shri Atal BIhari Vajpayee decided to create the three States of Uttarakhand, Jharkhand and Chhatisgarh. Needless to say that the creation of these three States has helped the regions for whose benefit the States were created. The then home Minister, Shri L.K. Advani handled the creation of the three States. Whereas the creation of Chhatisgarh and Uttarakhand did not face much resistance, there was an initial resistance by the ruling party of Bihar, the RJD. The Home Minister held wide consultations with all the States. A comfort level was given to each of the States that the creation of the new States would not adversely impact upon them. They were assured that the residuary State would be compensated. Unanimous resolutions were passed by the legislatures of the three States. Thereafter, both Houses of Parliament discussed the issue and by a general consensus approved the creation of the three States. Internal issues with regard to the three new States were also handled carefully. Dehradun was made the capital of Uttarakhand. The hill region of Almora was compensated by locating the High Court at Nainital. Raipur was the capital of Chhatisgarh and the High Court was created in Bilapur. The existing buildings were renovated overnight to locate the Sachivalya and the High Court premises. There was no dissent. Not a single protest took place in any of the States. As the Law Minister I visited all the three States for inauguration of the High Court Benches. There was an environment of celebration amongst the people. They were grateful to the NDA for having fulfilled the poll promise. Contradistinct it with what is happening in Andhra Pradesh. Both the regions of Telengana and Seemandhra suspect the intention of the Congress Party. Adequate home work has not been done. The deft political handling required to identify the issues and balance the creation of the new State with a possible sense of injustice that people in Seemandhra may feel has not been done. Alternatively, both regions are in a state of turmoil. The ruling party itself is on the verge of split. The State Legislature has reacted adversely to the Centre’s proposal. Consensus required to be done even within the Congress Party has not been done. A well intentioned cause for the creation of Telengana which fulfills the aspirations of the people has been made controversial on account of the lack of political management.
It is still not too late. Interests of both the regions should be factored in and justice should be done with regard to the issues of power, irrigation and eventual creation of new capital for Seemandhra. A good cause which is badly handled can hurt the cause. I do hope that the needful is done and Telengana sees the light of the day.
Posted on 31 January, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
As the elections appear closer, the nervousness in the Congress Party has become more visible. Each one is frantically concerned about his own position rather than wanting the Congress Party to get ready for a spirited fight.
Amethi was a fortress of the Congress Party. It is Rahul Gandhi’s constituency. It has been nourished by the family for four decades. The very idea that the Raja of Amethi Sanjay Singh may contest against Rahul Gandhi was enough to scare the Congress Party’s de facto Prime Ministerial candidate. The Raja of Amethi had to be accommodated in the Rajya Sabha from Assam. A firewall of sorts has to be created around Amethi to secure the constituency. Additionally, deals are being worked out with the SP and the BSP not to put up candidate from the minority community against the sitting MP. In the process not only has the leader of the Congress Party displayed his personal nervousness but the party’s prospects in Assam have been considerably damaged. States in the North East and Jammu & Kashmir are particularly sensitive and want their own candidates to be elected to the Parliament.
Senior leaders from Haryana, Himachal Pradesh and Chhattisgarh who should have been leading the party’s campaign in this election have sought nominations for the Upper House.
The position of the allies is no different. The Trinamool Congress, the DMK and the TRS amongst the major allies have already drifted away from the UPA. Amongst the current allies the principal ones are the NCP and the National Conference. The NCP has been giving conflicting signals on a daily basis. The statements of its leaders on the 2002 Gujarat riots go contrary to the Congress Party’s line. The National Conference has realized that an alliance with the ruling party of New Delhi will be counter-productive to it in the Kashmir valley. It is preparing itself for a break.
No State unit of the Congress party in recent history had the courage to defy the Central leadership. Most Congressmen from Andhra Pradesh led by the Chief Minister have decided to defy the party line on Telengana. The next in store will be cross voting in the Rajya Sabha elections in Andhra Pradesh. All this could lead to split in a State which provided the largest number of seats to the Congress both in 2004 and 2009.
And finally my friend Mr. P. Chidambaram, the Union Finance Minister appears to be planning life after the North Block. He is an extremely competent lawyer. Parliament’s loss will be Supreme Court’s gain. From the kind of statements he is making and the academic questions he is posing to his opponents, I suspect that he is practising to get back to column writing. I am sure his columns will make an excellent reading.
Posted on 29 January, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
The Finance Minister Mr. P Chidambaram has commented that the amount of economics that Mr. Narendra Modi knows can be written on the backside of a postal stamp. This statement comes from a keen student of economics who can be credited with pushing India’s GDP growth to below 5%.
Mr. Chidambaram believes that he is a principal repository of all economic wisdom. It is a different matter that he along with the other members of the UPA’s dream team to manage the economy, have presented to the country not a dream but a nightmare. Political administrators who manage the economy are not known by their academic attributes. They are known by the footprints of performance they leave behind.
Mr. P V Narasimha Rao and Mr. Atal Behari Vajpayee had no claim to high levels of scholarship in economics. Experts are always available for special assignments in a Government. It’s a different matter that the Congress Party chooses to make them Finance Ministers. Political Leaders are expected to provide the leadership and decisiveness required for the management of the economy. They need to have a broad idea of the management of political economy. They are required to build consensus on economic issues. If consensus is not forthcoming they must assert themselves and overrule the critics. It is this quality that both Mr. Rao and Mr. Vajpayee had. It is for this reason that they find a special mention in history.
Mr. Narendra Modi does not claim to be an economist. The manner in which he has administered Gujarat for the past 12 years has demonstrated his decisiveness and ability. Gujarat is an industrial hub of India. It is a manufacturing State. Its agricultural economy has grown in double digits. Its growth figures are higher than those of the rest of the country. Unlike Mr. Modi, Mr. Chidambaram and his Prime Minister did not have the ability to overrule their critics. They caved in even when obsolete suggestions were made by their Party leadership. Observers today do not share Mr. Chidambaram’s opinion about Mr. Modi. In fact, the revival of the Investment cycle is being linked to a change in Government where Dr. Singh and Mr. Chidambaram go out and Mr. Modi comes in.
Mr. Modi has demonstrated his clarity and effectiveness in generating and expediting economic activity in Gujarat. His ability does not require certification of Mr. Chidambaram. But will Mr. Chidambaram with his customary wisdom educate us on the extent of economic knowledge and understanding his de facto Prime Ministerial candidate Mr. Rahul Gandhi possesses?
Posted on 29 January, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
A.G. Noorani belongs to a class of so-called thinkers/writers who thrive through pervert intellectualism and seek to stay relevant through outrageous postulations from time to time. The tone and tenor of Noorani’s discourse at a workshop held at Islamabad is yet again a manifestation of the same mind-set where he has once again resorted to his favourite Kashmir theme with anti-India overtones.
This is not the first time Noorani has expressed such views viz-a-viz Jammu and Kashmir but has infact been doing so for the last over three decades. This indulgence of his has endeared him to the separatist constituency in Kashmir valley as well as to the India baiters abroad.
Noorani’s self-righteous observation at the Islamabad workshop that “the right of the people of Kashmir to a plebiscite is an inherent right” is devoid of the understanding of political realities that have emerged in the Indian subcontinent after independence and partition.Just a four point rebuttal will suffice…
1) The reference to “plebiscite” or “referendum” made by Nehru to Liaqat Ali Khan, according to Noorani, was turned down then and there by Liaqat Ali himself.
2) Jammu & Kashmir acceded to India under the provisions of same Instrument of Accession and same legalities which were applicable to other princely states of the subcontinent. Thereafter, the acceptance of the constitution of India by the then Regent of J&K in November 1949 followed by endorsement of the same by the Constituent Assembly of J&K in February 1954 signified culmination of the process of determining the will of the people.
3) The UN resolution on “plebiscite” laid down two pre-requisites a) cease-fire and b) truce. When Pakistan failed to fulfill these pre-requisites, the UN Security Council in December 1948 stated that if Pakistan was not abiding by these conditions,the resolution was no longer a binding on India.
4) India is a federation and,according to International Law, “secession’ is not an option available in any federation.
Even as Noorani seeks to suggest new nomenclature of East Kashmir and West Kashmir for Indian part of Jammu & Kashmir and Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK) respectively, he conveniently remains oblivious of the fate of erstwhile East Pakistan and West Pakistan with the birth of Bangladesh quite in negation of the “two nation theory” which had inspired the concept of Pakistan.
Noorani is factually incorrect when he says that after, what he describes as “Agra rebuff”, Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee had nothing to offer Pakistan. The truth is that NDA regime under Vajpayee had relentlessly endeavoured to improve the relations between two countries despite a series of deterrents including the Kargil war.
Noorani’s suggestion that a peaceful solution to the so-called Kashmir problem must include India, Pakistan and people of Kashmir is nothing but an echo of the separatist rhetoric which has since been rejected.
As far as India is concerned, the only pending agenda over Jammu & Kashmir, as also endorsed by the 1994 unanimous resolution of the Indian Parliament, is to retrieve back the area of the State which continues to be under illegal occupation of Pakistan.
Noorani, would do well to understand the fact that end of hostility and export of terrorism is the basic prerequisite for ensuring peace in the region, and to that extent, he could have used his Pakistan visit to prevail upon the powers-that-be in Islamabad to stop sponsoring militancy on the Indian soil.
Posted on 28 January, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
Arnab Goswami’s interview with Rahul Gandhi was a lesson for the interviewer. There are advantages in letting the guest speak. By speaking the guest may even expose his own inadequacies.
After watching the interview and reading its transcript, the question that crossed my mind was “ What has Rahul Gandhi to offer to this country?” or “Is he too confused to get into the specifics and therefore goes into the generalities. “
I deal with some of the comments made in the interview.
Why is there no Prime Ministerial candidate of the Congress.
The answer was clearly unconvincing. We all know that the MPs of the ruling party alone elect a leader, who is the Prime Minister. We equally know that projecting shadow Prime Ministers is neither unconstitutional nor extra-constitutional. It happens all over the world.
On changing the system and empowerment of people
We are a parliamentary democracy. That is the system best suited for India. Which is the alternative system that Rahul Gandhi has in mind. He says he believes in democracy, in opening up the system, in RTI and giving power to the people. These are his differences with Narendra Modi. I doubt very much if these are seriously areas of difference. Everybody in Indian politics has to believe in democracy, openness and in empowering the people. Why should he give himself a self-certification that he believes in RTI and empowerment. The fact that candidates are decided by a few people may be happening in the Congress Party. In the BJP the block units and district units recommend candidates to the State units. The State Units bring them to the Central Election Committee. It is only after extensive consultation that the candidates are decided. Even for the Prime Ministerial candidate we have gone through an informal process of galaxy of leaders being presented before the party and the people and the most suitable one is finally declared. The de facto Prime Ministerial candidate of the Congress Party is decided on the basis of the family he belongs to. If Rahul Gandhi was a member of any other political party he would still be struggling to become a party office bearer. He needs to speak about the Congress Party needing a change and not the whole system.
On making India a manufacturing hub and its comparison with China
What has the UPA done in the last 10 years in this regard. China’s core competence is low cost manufacturing. Consumers prefer to buy goods which are cheaper. To make the manufacturing sector in India competitive, the manufacturing sector needed to be incentivized in terms of a modest interest rate regime, a world class infrastructure, competitive cost of utilities particularly power, trade facilitation, a globally competitive taxation regime, quick decision making and labour regime flexibility. Even though the last of these is politically more challenging, has the UPA government even moved an inch with regard to the other reforms required. The answer is a clear ‘No’.
Comparison between 1984 riots and the 2002 riots in Gujarat
In 1984 a slogan “Khoon ka Badla Khoon” started in the afternoon of 31st October 1984 at the AIIMS where Mrs.Gandhi’s body lay. Congress Leaders were seen leading the mobs. Sikhs were massacred at thousands of places. No where did the police fire a single bullet to disperse mobs. Cases were not investigated. A Commission of Inquiry was constituted which came with a sham report. The Judge heading the Commission was subsequently made a Congress Party’s Member of the Rajya Sabha. Justice evades the victims even now.
In Gujarat thousands of people were arrested. The badly over-powered police fired at several places. Almost 300 rioters were killed in police firing. Thousands of prosecutions were filed. Hundreds of people have been sentenced. The Chief Minister of the State Government personally went through several inquiries including the Supreme Court constituted SIT and no evidence was found against him.
Where did Rahul Gandhi get this idea that in 1984 there was no participation of the State?
On Corruption
The Congress Party has tied up with a convicted leader in Bihar. Without Lalu Prasad Yadav there is no RJD. Rahul Gandhi has looked the other way when it comes to allegations against Chief Minister of Himachal Pradesh Shri Vir Bhadra Singh. He pays lip sympathy to probity when former CM of Maharashtra Ashok Chavan is bailed out. He chooses to keep quiet on the 2G spectrum allocation and the coal blocks allocation. He believes that some legislations will resolve the menace of corruption.
The most startling statement in the interview
“I am absolutely against the concept of dynasty, anybody who knows me knows that and understands that”- Rahul Gandhi says in the interview. Surely Mr. Gandhi you don’t expect India to believe you on that.
Posted on 27 January, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
The 2014 General Elections are about three months away. The election will be spread over several phases. The current expectation is that with the election notification the campaign would pick up towards the end of March and would continue through April and May 2014. Curiously the Congress Party’s poll advertisements in print, on TV and outdoor have started appearing from January onwards. Election advertising is a costly affair. Besides the normal cost of advertising, several mediums place an election premium on the rates of advertisements. The rates therefore multiply manifolds. The normal practice has been that with the filing of nomination papers, advertisement starts and picks up during the two weeks permitted for campaigning.
Obviously, the Congress Party has earmarked a huge budget for advertising, if advertising is spread over four months. Besides the volume of proposed advertising, the content of the message is curious. Ostensibly, the Party has decided not to have a Prime Ministerial candidate. Effectively, the campaign is centered around one person, who is the Congress Party’s ‘candidate in purdah’. In the campaign that has appeared so far, there is no mention of the present Prime Minister. There is no mention of the performance of the UPA government. It has not even a mention of the Congress Party President. The entire campaign is centered around Rahul Gandhi. However, Rahul Gandhi indeed is a non candidate for Prime Ministership (since the party has no official candidate). Why is it that the campaign is centered around him?
The answer to this is apparent. The Congress does not want to admit that it is officially projecting Rahul Gandhi as Prime Ministerial candidate. An adverse result may make him accountable. It is therefore attempting an alternative strategy of having a de facto candidate rather than a de jure candidate. A positive result will be credited to Rahul Gandhi and a negative result will be debited to Congress Party.
The Party had a few days ago denied that it has earmarked a huge sum of money for image management of Rahul Gandhi. It now appears that the denial was a phony one. Can an image be built up merely by advertising which is not commensurate with the performance of the candidate sought to be projected? There are leaders who appear good only when the going is good. In an adverse situation they collapse like a house of cards. Advertising can market a marketable product, not otherwise.
Posted on 26 January, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
India today celebrates its 65th anniversary of the Republic. It is on this day that we gave ourselves a liberal Constitution. Parliamentary democracy, federal structure, a bundle of fundamental rights, judicial review by an independent judiciary are amongst the salient features of that Constitution.
Having witnessed various challenges and having shown great resilience to overcome these challenges, I do believe that we are a strong and vibrant democracy. I have a few areas of concern which lay down an agenda for the future. Poverty continues to be the greatest curse on Indian society. Nearly 30 percent of our population lives below the poverty line. The poor is denied the right to live with dignity. Terrorism and insurgency remain a great threat to India’s sovereignty. The threat of terror is both external and from within. We cannot afford to lower our guard on this score. The quality of politics in India needs to improve. The power of politics is immense. The stature of men who man politics must be in consonance with the huge power that politicians wield. The declining quality of politics reflects itself on issues of governance. India today expects governance which will deliver on problems which confront the society. If India can grow at 9% on average to bad governance, what will be the growth rate if the quality of politics and governance were to improve? India needs to become a more humane and compassionate society. Our concern for women and under privileged must be reflected in our attitudes. Increased offences against women and the brutality of those offences is a scar on our society. It is these and many more challenges that confront us. Let us show our determination to overcome these challenges.
Posted on 25 January, 2014, No Comments Comments admin
The right to peacefully protest ispart of legitimate political activity. Protest is a form of expression. Undoubtedly every citizen has a right to dissent, protest being a form of dissent.
Is this right to be denied to the Head of an elected government? This is a question that the Chief Minister of Delhi has asked. There is a responsibility on an elected Government and its Head to carry on the governance of the State in accordance with the Constitution. If we examine the details of what the AAP government in Delhi did, the answer to the question will be as self-evident. The Ministers abandoned the Sachivalya. They took the police by surprise and engineered a dharna at a place where it was prohibited. They broke the law. They sent messages to their supporters to assemble in large numbers. Their supporters tried to break the police barricade. The Head of the Government delivered a speech advocating anarchy as a form of government. He appealed to policemen to go on leave, discard their uniform and join the protest. He threatened to obstruct the Republic Day parade by marching lakhs of his supporters on to the Rajpath. If the police in Delhi had responded to his call and abandoned its duty coupled with an invasion of his supporters during the Republic Day parade at the Rajpath, could it be said that the governance is being carried on in accordance with the Constituition. The answer to this question is a definitive ‘No’.
There is a difference between sitting on a fast at Rajghat and giving a call to policemen to abandon their duty and obstructing the Republic Day parade. I am sure Shri Arvind Kejriwal realizes this.