Assessment that doesn't rely on lutyens' and corporate cosy clubs but on performance
Bias is boss. The recent ratings of Modi’s ministers by various
agencies show unanimity is subverted by subjectivity. Accessibility,
visibility, connectivity and maneuverability of ministers dictate
perception. As a result, those with access to huge funds, elevated
social status and high visibility in appropriate forums, including the
media, ranked high while ministers with less accessibility, media
patronage, financial lebensraum to oblige favour-seekers and are targets
of corporate ire tanked.
Frankly speaking, this rating too is
affected by personal biases. But with a difference. It is based more on
my reporting experience of over 35 years, and not by how many times I
wined and dined with powerful but discreet ministers, tycoons and
diplomats. It is based on speaking to bhakts, karyakartas and foes and
friends of the ministers. Making an objective job card of all the 26
Cabinet ministers and 12 MoS holding independent charge is a tough call.
I have restricted my assessment to the top ten, by using the cardinal
principle of ‘Sirf Kaam Machaye Shor’ (only performance makes a noise).
1. Nitin Gadkari, 61, Minister for Road Transport and Highways, and Shipping Spends more time on the road than at work. The minister who thinks most
out of the box. A risk-taker who changes the rule if it obstructs his
agenda. Has activated jammed highway projects, cleared new ones and
upgraded existing ones— a spend of over Rs. 2 lakh crore till 2019. On
an average, about 20 km of road being added to the network daily.
Changed road taxation policy, toll collection laws, made waterways
transport a viable business. Established better coordination with state
governments. (9/10) 2. Dharmendra Pradhan, 47, MoS (Independent Charge) for Petroleum and Natural Gas Low profile. Spends more time researching his portfolio than making
aluring promises. Implemented many of the PM’s social schemes by
exploiting rock-bottom crude oil prices. Ensured gas conections for the
maximum number of rural folk. Was able to implement the Give It Up
campaign, thus saving over `12,000 crore in welfare. Over two million
gave up subsidised connections. (8.5/10) 3. Sushma Swaraj, 64, Minister for External Affairs Despite frail health, the most frequent flier in Modi’s cabinet, and not
just to glamorous destinations. With 5.1 million Twitter followers,
one of the few mantris who remain cyber-connected with not just
diplomats but also with ordinary Indians. Resolves issues instantly.
Created a world record by safely getting back the most number of
captives from countries in IS-occupied territories. Though it is the PM
who calls the shots on global affairs, Swaraj is his most effective
ambassador. (8/10) 4. Rajnath Singh, 65, Minister for Home Affairs This low-profile ministry lands in the news only when terror attacks or
Naxal violence happens. Gets no credit since secretive tactics make
victories classified. Using a comprehensive information network, has
aborted many terror conspiracies hatched across the border. Infiltrators
prevented from striking in India. Brought down Naxal attacks. Police
reform process, stuck in budget constraints, restarted. Made
Centre-state relations smooth. Most accessible minister to BJP workers. (7.5/10) 5. Smriti Irani, 40, Minister for Human Resource Development Despite modest educational background, the youngest-ever HRD minister is
the government’s most effective communicator, compared to most
predecessors with degrees and pedigree. Purged the educational system
and other government-sponsored think-tanks of Leftist elements. Stuck to
agenda, unconcerned by attacks from elitist elements within the party
and outside. Introduced sweeping reforms and finalised the New Education
Policy, which will send Macaulayputras on the run. (7.10)
6. Prakash Javadekar, 65, Minister of State (IC) for Environment, Forest and Climate Change Transformed the political and bureaucratic ecosystem. Created a record
by clearing over 2,000 languishing projects. By interacting with
stakeholders, including the states, transformed an anti-growth ministry
through a Jack the Beanstalk approach. Mojo: Grow with Green. Darling of
both big biz and environmentalists. (6.5/10)
7. Piyush Goyal, 52, Minister of State (Independent Charge) for Power, Coal, New and Renewable Energy
NDA’s Great Innovator. USP is a robust monitoring system. Revived most
PSU power utilities. Mission: Green Energy. Distributed a record number
of LED bulbs. Garnered maximum bids for coal mines, most of which are
yet to start production. Power reforms sluggish with state companies
chalking up huge losses. (6/10)
8. Suresh Prabhu, 62, Minister for Railways Has used every trick in the book to bring railways on track and convert
it into a corporate-style public sector entity. Mantra: use technology
over human resources to make the infamously accident-prone Indian
Railways safe. His Swachh Rail emphasis on selected, high-traffic
stations paying off. The ministry has given big orders for new rolling
stock and other equipment to private entrepreneurs. No safe clean rail
journey for rural travellers. Instead of finding new sources of revenue,
resorted to raising passengers and freight fares. (5/10) 9. Arun Jaitley, 63, Minister for Finance, and Information & Broadcasting Modi’s most well-connected, visible and ominously influential minister.
The din he makes speaks louder than actual work done. Most successful in
diverting attention from ministry’s failure. Status quo-ist. No fresh
ideas to tackle the economy. Raised revenues by taxing the poor and
middle class, while keeping the interests of rich and corporates intact.
Achieved revenue generation boost from increased indirect taxation
rather than inventive thinking. Deficit under control primarily due to
plunge in crude oil prices and reduction of budget allocation for
various social sectors. (4/10)
10. Radha Mohan Singh, 66, Minister for Agriculture NDA’s worst performer. Despite India’s growth of over 7 per cent,
agriculture growing at less than 1 per cent. No proper administrative
and fiscal system for farmers. Over 35 per cent of the country is
drought-stricken, but this farmer is wandering in the wilderness. No new
reform introduced. No future road map. This list may be
disagreeable to those for whom publicity, and not perception, decides
the parameters of performance. But then, that’s what objectivity about
subjects is all about. (3/10)
prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla
If the Gandhi brand has to regain sheen, two power centres must make way for one
Dear Soniaji and Rahulji,
I can appreciate the
pain and disappointment you are experiencing after the Congress party’s
recent debacle in the state polls. In market-driven politics, the
shelf-life of a leader as a brand is tenuously linked with the ability
to attract eyeballs. Under your leadership, the Congress has lost two
more states—Kerala and Assam. Its performance in Tamil Nadu is
lamentable. Apart from Karnataka, it rules just six picayune states as
against the BJP’s nine important ones. The Congress has barely managed
to retain its old numbers in the West Bengal Assembly, doomed by an
alliance with its ideological opponent, the CPI(M). The Left’s loss in
West Bengal, however, was handsomely compensated by its gigantic gains
in Kerala. Both were at the cost of the Congress.
Most of your
loyal leaders and workers, for whom the Congress is a meal ticket, doubt
its ability to provide a secure political future. Some among them are
alarmed that Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s mission to achieve a
Congress-mukt Bharat may become a reality sooner than later. The party
has maintained its mirage of unity, without a whisper of disloyalty from
important leaders or ordinary workers, who are yet to air their doubts
about your ability to win elections. I’m sure millions of unsolicited
advisories have landed on your desks. I’m equally sure that neither of
you have given them a dekko, because only you can comprehend the reason
your party was decimated. While you, Rahul, made a valiant attempt to
turn voters around by touring poll-bound states extensively, your mother
Sonia was conspicuous by her absence in many crucial areas. Soniaji,
you must realise that the invisibility of the Gandhis during a campaign
renders the rank and file sightless. Millions of Congress workers were
missing you both, since there was no one else to energise voters who are
disenchanted with the current cult and culture of the party.
I’ve
been covering elections for over three decades. For the first time, I
discovered that Congress candidates were not invoking Brand Gandhi to
tilt the electoral battle in their favour. In the past, they chanted
slogans eulogising Jawaharlal Nehru, Indira Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi.
Today it is you they would hail. In the last polls, however, the
usually unflinching blind faith in the Gandhis was missing. Candidates
looked for leaders and slogans according to their discretion. I could
spot the dilemma churning their minds. The cadre and leaders were split
through the middle. They were unsure about who among either of you
should be chosen as the party’s current and future face to lead it and
rule the country.
Soniaji, you have been at the helm of the
Congress for 18 years. It’s a record. Rahul, you have been in active
politics for over a decade and have held important party positions for
over five years. But total confusion prevails in the workers’ mind about
the role you play in the party. There is no division of power or
responsibilities. The Congress is visibly divided between the Sonia
Congress and Rahul Congress. For the past few years, party leaders all
over India have not been able to discern which one of you calls the
shots. Even chief ministerial candidates, senior leaders, chief
ministers and important office-bearers of the party are frustrated over
the absence of a clear policy-making structure in the party. Most
committed workers believe that more than the party’s infirm image, it is
the existence of two power centres that is causing the Congress, which
had ruled India for five decades, to lose its way.
Whenever a new
satrap took over the Congress, they gave it a novel look and vision.
Indiraji created a new Congress by purging the Syndicate. Sanjay
introduced aggression with a Right-of-Centre ideological shift. Rajiv
brought in young blood and modern minds. P V Narasimha Rao tried to
dismantle what he thought was the Rajiv Congress, but lost the plot.
Sitaram Kesri was the only aberration in Congress history. In you,
Soniaji, the Congress found a leader rooted in the Gandhi Parivar
culture. You, however, refrained from any significant surgery though the
body was ailing. You carried the old guard along and ensured that the
party came to power in 2004 and 2009 by forging alliances even with
those who had made personal attacks on you. You re-invented the Congress
as India’s ruling party. But during the party’s decade in power, its
credibility decayed as numerous scams erupted at regular intervals. The
Opposition held you responsible. Some leaders charged you both of
encouraging corruption or being personally involved in some of the
scandals. The jury is still out since no evidence has surfaced against
any either of you yet.
Predictably, perception is precious in
political power play. It is not for the first time that your party has
suffered electoral reverses. From 1977 onwards, its fortunes have passed
through hills and valleys. The Congress had always bounced back because
a leader with national appeal held the rudder. The party is still a
national brand. Even during the 2016 elections, its vote share rose
compared to its performance in the 2014 general elections. But its USP,
the Gandhis, got a battering. The password to victory used to be
‘Gandhi’. Now it is seen as a firewall.
When Modi talks about a
Congress-free India, he actually means India sans Gandhis in politics.
He and his party have projected you as the symbols of all that was wrong
in the UPA government. Today, both of you have to decide not just your
own political futures, but also that of your party. India needs a strong
and constructive Opposition led by credible leaders. One of you has to
opt for VRS, so that there is only one Gandhi in charge. In new age
politics, individuals personify ideology. The idea of the Congress is
immortal. But if the Sangh Parivar acquires the domains of the
pre-Independence Congress, the fault lies with the Gandhi Parivar. It is
between you two to decide which Gandhi has the chutzpah to revive the
sinking and shrinking Congress.
prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla
Executive's assault on judiciary will only kill the essential spirit of the constitution
It is the destiny of men to pass into the great beyond one day. But
the institutions created by mankind are meant to survive to promote and
protect the system. Though their arbitrary misuse of power causes
critical confrontations. The Indian Constitution—the world’s
longest—strongly emphasises the division of power between the executive,
judiciary and legislature. The wise men and women who wrote it
anticipated a conflict between politicians and judges. They, however,
hardly foresaw the depth of animosity that could rise between the two
pillars of democracy.
The oppugnancy between the executive and
judiciary is not new. But today, it has escalated into a turf war rather
than a civilised disagreement in the spirit of the Constitution.
Rattled by the rising number of judicial verdicts against various
actions of the executive and legislature, politicians across the
spectrum have unsheathed their swords against the judiciary.
Legislatures, including Parliament, have been turned into platforms to
launch diatribes against the judiciary.
During the last session of
Parliament, the judiciary was targeted sans serious provocation. None
other than Finance Minister Arun Jaitley led the attack. The House was
discussing financial issues, but he chose the occasion to hit out at the
judiciary, accusing it of destroying “step by step, brick by brick, the
edifice of India’s legislature”.
Jaitley was echoing the views of
not only PM Narendra Modi, but also of former PMs like Manmohan Singh,
as well as a number of powerful leaders across parties. Last year, Modi
lamented the rising tendency of judicial activism. Addressing a
conference of Chief Justices and CMs, he had said, “It is never too
difficult to deliver justice within the boundaries of the law and
Constitution. But it is very difficult to find the truth between
perception and reality. It must be pondered over whether five-star
activists are driving the judiciary today… if havoc is created to drive
the judiciary. It has become difficult to deliver justice in an
atmosphere of perception”. He also criticised the long vacations enjoyed
by high court and Supreme Court judges, especially the month-long
summer break in the apex court. His predecessor had expressed his
annoyance with the judiciary by warning, “The judicial family must
consider the ills that face the judicial system with concern and find
quick solutions for it. Any further delay in finding such solutions will
only jeopardise the integrity and efficacy of judicial institutions”.
India
is not alone where the political leadership is concerned about what it
perceives as judicial encroachment. In the 1800s, America’s Founding
Father and president, who was the principal author of the Declaration of
Independence, Thomas Jefferson had noted, “Judicial activism makes a
thing of wax in the hands of judiciary which it can give the shape as it
wishes.”Apart from politicos, the judiciary is also under attack from
agenda-driven civil society. There are numerous examples of activists
attacking judicial pronouncements, which went against their ideological
convictions.
If political leaders have been acerbic in their
criticism, judges have not kept schtum either. In April, Chief Justice T
S Thakur, while sharing a platform with the PM, made it clear that his
fraternity cannot be blamed for the executive’s mistakes. Speaking in a
voice trembling with emotion, he clarified, “It is not only in the name
of a litigant or people languishing in jails but also in the name of
development of the country, that I beseech you to rise to the occasion
and realise that it is not enough to criticise. You cannot shift the
entire burden on the judiciary.” He responded on judicial vacations by
saying, “Do you think we go to Manali or some other hill stations to
enjoy ourselves? If he (the PM) thinks we have long vacations, he is
entitled to hold on to his views. But only a judge, his wife and
children can tell you how much judges enjoy in the vacations.”
Behind
the verbal duel between the judiciary and executive lies the reality of
various arms of the latter abandoning their basic duty of providing
responsive and clean governance. During the past two decades, the courts
have rapped the executive’s knuckles on various issues by:
•
Quashing the National Judicial Accountability Act, which would have
given decisive role to executive in the selection of judges
• Striking down caste and religious reservations by various states
• Barring politicians from contesting polls after conviction and vacating seats
• Taking serious view of scams and ordering court-monitored probe
• Preventing state governments from playing with environment
• Striking down imposition of Article 356 in Uttarakhand
• Giving freedom to investigative agencies to probe politicians and civil servants without seeking approval of any authority
• Cleansing the corruption-ridden BCCI, which is largely dominated by political leaders.
It
is not the judiciary, which is becoming more involved in the
administration of the state, but the rising number of citizens who are
approaching various courts for the redressal of their grievances after
they failed to get justice from government departments. The state is the
largest litigant in India. According to legal luminaries, the judiciary
has stepped in whenever the executive has failed. But politicians
assert that unelected persons cannot be given the power to reverse
decisions taken by an elected government in the public interest.
A
prominent jurist fired a robust rebuttal, maintaining that the
Constitution was written on behalf of the people while it is only
one-third of the voters, which elect a government. Fortunately, the
judiciary enjoys far more credibility than the executive. Any attempt to
damage its reputation through insulations and legislations will only
kill the essential spirit of the Constitution. At a time when the nation
is witnessing the growth of confrontationist politics, any attempt to
weaken the judiciary will strike at the roots of Indian democracy and
its Constitution.
prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla
As Messenger Becomes the Message, Media Must Scrutinise Itself to Retain Reliability
The media is under threat from within. It is no longer seen as a
credible medium. Its messages are massacred mercilessly. Never before
has its credibility and dependability been under so much scrutiny.
Profanities like crooks, paid media, sponsored news brokers, and
‘bhakts’ are heaped on journalists. As competitive and confrontationist
politics, coupled with valuation and TRP-driven media organisations,
dictates political engagement, the entire tribe has been tarred
unilaterally with the black brush of scepticism. Numerous news outfits
and prominent journalists are being exposed for their coloured
ideological views instead of being lauded for earth-shattering news
breaks. They are known for what they speak and not by what they write.
Agenda-driven opinion and biased news peddled by some of us as
‘exclusive’ or explosive stories drive the print and electronic media.
This has provided political parties and their promoters tactical tools
to destroy the fourth pillar of democracy. Are newspersons the most
preferred targets because they are asking too many inconvenient
questions? Or because some of us do not mind our own business and meddle
in someone else’s?
For the past few months, it is not political
leaders but the media, which has been targeted by the social media and
rampant rumour-mongers to tar and test the image of the journalists as a
genre. Last week, over half a million references were made on myriad
Internet platforms to unnamed scribes, who are suspected to be involved
in defence deals in the past few years. According to media reports, one
of the journalists was called for interrogation by investigative
agencies. Another is under their scanner for receiving prodigious payoff
from defence dealers. The agencies are yet to come to any conclusion.
By not naming and shaming the journalists, the ruling establishment and
power-seekers are shifting the blame from the real culprits to the
fringe players. Journalists involved in shady criminal deals should be
treated at par with other suspects. By revealing their names in public
interest, the profession’s credibility as a whole will be rescued from
ignominious insinuations. Jurists and legal luminaries are convinced
that by going public with the names of those summoned for questioning on
their role in the AgustaWestland and Rafale deals would only strengthen
the case of the agencies and save various institutions from becoming
victims of a sinister scheme.
Defence procurements are a major
source of tainted money worldwide. Many global leaders have been named
in scandals involving defence deals. It’s been proved that loot stashed
in tax havens was from purchasing hardly required defence equipment.
Over the past four decades, a multitude of dirty deals on Bofors guns,
Scorpene submarines and fighter aircraft have been exposed. Since the
Congress ruled India for over five decades, most such deals were signed
on its watch; hence its leaders and followers have always been perceived
as the suspects or beneficiaries. As India spends over $12 billion
annually on importing defence hardware and software, this provides
enough scope for middlemen, senior officials and their political masters
to tailor specifications according to the highest bidder’s wishes. As
the market for weapons, including fabulous flying machines, grows,
multinationals hustling them use sophisticated skills to influence the
decision-making process in the government. Some in the media and defence
analysts and security experts have become the most sought-after
influence peddlers. These corporations fund a multitude of well-funded
think-tanks in the US, Europe and the UK to enrol prominent journalists,
opinion writers and retired defence officials as faculty members or
visitors. Many of these think-tanks have opened shop in India to
camouflage their real mission. According to reliable sources, the
government has already started the scrutiny of Indian frequent flyers,
who spread their carbon footprint to participate in seminars dealing
with defence and strategic issues. The inquiry is also aimed at
unearthing the financial supporters of the think-tanks to discover if
the defence industry is supporting any of the big fish. Some Indian
civil servants, journalists and opinion-makers have been part of these
institutions for short or long durations.
Undoubtedly, there are
some bad apples in the media basket. But that doesn’t give the enemies
of freedom of expression the right to kill the medium through the
massive and ominous use of state machinery, corporate muscle power and a
malicious whisper campaign through the social media. With the rise of
trolls as the most effective agents to counter propaganda-driven
dissemination of views and news, the mainstream media is under pressure
to mend the way it reports news. Some of us have gone cyber-active not
to give news but unpalatable views against the established political and
corporate order. Once journalism was an institution, which encouraged
hard news rather than advertising the faces behind it. Young journalists
were told to report facts and carry both sides of a story. Now many
credible civil society leaders feel that numerous journalists draw
conclusions first and use convenient facts to bolster their
predetermined views. Many journalists express their opinions on the
social media in a way that exposes their ideological or personal
predilections. Some names are associated with a leader or a party. As
journalists and media owners claim to be serving the public cause, they
are entitled to all the facilities and courtesies available to other
institutions performing similar responsibilities. But if the media has
to retain its reliability, it has to subject itself to robust scrutiny.
All mediapersons should follow the same rules and regulations, which
elected representatives do. The declaration of assets, contacts,
corporate and political affiliations and sources of income by leading
journos and editors would definitely help in restoring the people’s
faith in the profession. So far, the media had the monopoly of seeking
accountability in others. Times have changed. Now readers and
viewers—the real patrons of the media—are asking it to be accountable or
perish.
prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla
Up in Arms to Dig Ugly Past of Enemies will Endow no Party with Brighter Future
Poison kills poison, as Duryodhan discovered to his chagrin. When
used in ignorance, it kills both the dispenser and the dispensee.
Parties assume that poisonous attacks are the only method to flummox
foes. Today, past acts of omission and commission have become lethal
weapons to neutralise opponents. For the last two years, no party has
refrained from digging up the past of adversaries and flung the
unsavoury parts into the political abattoir. Promises made during the
elections, in 24 months, are not even a remembrance of things past. None
of them have taken out peace marches, candlelight processions or
walkathons to the Human Rights Commission office to protest the fact
that 300-odd drought-struck districts are being denied even basic
facilities like drinking water. Instead, defence acquisitions meant to
protect the country have become public pantomimes of poisonous
projectiles.
Undoubtedly corruption, bribery and nepotism are
major threats to the survival of democracy and good governance. But they
need to be tackled by investigative agencies. Let the law take its
course. But, like the rapacious Indian rivers in flood, Indian laws,
too, have deviated from their original course, thanks to the massive
encroachment and erosion on the polity by politically pushed probes.
None of the well-connected bribe givers or takers in the Bofors scandal
have been brought to book, even after 30 years. Shouldn’t Indian leaders
be worried about the saboteurs within who derail the legal process?
Isn’t the fact that those named in the AgustaWestland scam continue to
perambulate through Lutyens’ Delhi’s charmed circles a cause of worry?
This shows that the caucus of corporate cartels, middlemen, political
leaders and civil servants who paint files and proposals in the colours
of the cocktails and cuisine served at coterie dinners is alive and
well.
It is a deserving topic for a doctoral thesis as to why not a
soul has been convicted for over a dozen major corruption scandals in
the past 40 years—the Bofors affair, the Scorpene deal, the Airbus
payoff, the Barak Missile scam, stock market manipulations etc. If
scandal-ridden Italy, where probity in public life is under a shadow,
can conclude the `3,546-crore helicopter scam trial and jail important
officials, including the chairman of tech-giant Finmeccanica, how come
all key players in the scam, whose names have popped up in India, are
roaming around freely in the corridors of power and are VIP guests at
political and corporate weddings? An FIR was registered in 2013 and only
a Delhi-based lawyer was arrested. The grilling of star suspects was a
farce. They were invited for a ceremonial trip to the offices of the
investigative agencies. Letter rogatories were dispatched to a couple of
countries, routinely seeking details of the transactions. It is only
after the Italian trial was finished and its contents made their way
into the Indian media and Parliament that the agencies decided to summon
the suspects or witnesses.
It is evident that all such scandals
remain unresolved, only to be later used by parties to their advantage
during and after elections. Undoubtedly, the chopper scam is one of the
dirtiest defence deals in recent times. The UPA government signed it
under pressure from lobbyists. It was cancelled after the media exposed
the role of powerful middlemen. The Italian court has concluded beyond
doubt that dirty dealings dominated the sign off. But in India, the
issue has turned into a fight between the ruling BJP and the Congress.
The government is copiously quoting from the verdict to expose the role
of Congress leaders in helping middlemen make money. The party is
hitting back for the delay in nabbing the real perpetrators. Ironically,
the papers were signed during the UPA regime, though the process to
acquire the helicopters began after NDA came to power. In the absence of
any visible and credible action against the Indian suspects, the
Congress has decided to brazen it out. It has adopted a similar
approach, as the Bofors strategy. Since NDA I failed to prosecute any of
the suspects during its six-year rule, the Congress has given itself a
clean chit. It has challenged the BJP to prove any of the allegations
against it or its leaders. Mysteriously, some of the accused were
acquitted because investigative agencies failed to produce any original
document in court. Curiously, successive Central governments led by
either party never approached the Supreme Court to appeal against the
lower court orders. Even in L’affaire AgustaWestland, the Congress is
trying to turn the tables on its foe. It asked the NDA to explain the
reason for the defence ministry’s U-turn over banning Finmeccanica in
August 2014, and then diluting the decision a few weeks later.
The
moral of the current political slugfest is that parties are still in an
election mode. Both the text and subtext of the debate are written
using negative adjectives. By spotlighting the past sins of the
Congress, the ruling dispensation is giving a fresh lease of life to the
demoralised and decimated party. Voters had peremptorily shrunk its
tally in the Lok Sabha to just 44—the lowest since Independence. The BJP
must keep in mind that double jeopardy prevents anyone from being
punished twice for the same crime. Indira Gandhi was ejected by voters
for imposing the Emergency. But she was back in 30 months because the
ruling Janata Party was obsessed with sending her to prison instead of
providing a better government. But the Modi government is not Morarji
Desai’s. It has provided a corruption-free system. It has ensured
economic stability and decisive leadership. Despite a few flip-flops on
Pakistan, India is considered a prominent player in international
diplomacy. It has become a superbly attractive and glamorous destination
for foreign investors. Instead of projecting its achievements to put
opponents on the back foot, NDA strategists have chosen the path of
aggressive confrontation. They are convinced that revealing the ugly
past of its enemies will endow it with a brighter future. But it
shouldn’t forget that the mandate the people gave it, is not to harp on
murky antecedents but to cleanse politics and provide a clean and
productive present and future.
The moral of the current
political slugfest is that parties are still in election mode. By
spotlighting past sins of the Congress, ruling BJP is undermining its
own achievements and giving a fresh lease of life to the decimated party
prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla
Nitish's ATOM Politics May Well Set Contours of Confrontation for the Next Election
The road to good intentions is paved with hellfire. Any foolproof
planning in Indian politics missing a clear roadmap promises more
chances of failure than fortune. Slogans can ignite riots but cannot
deliver victory in war. Without even waiting for the outcome of the
recent Assembly polls, Bihar CM Nitish Kumar has announced his vision
and mission with sass and sauce. PM Narendra Modi wants a Congress Mukt
(Congress-free) India, but Nitish has blown the bugle for all non-BJP
parties to gather under his banner to establish a Sangh Mukt Bharat
(RSS-free Bharat) to save the democracy.
Nitish began his first
stint as the JD(U) chief with the ideological intention to polarise the
two national parties along political groupings. His clarion cry appears
to have united all non-BJP parties to oust Modi in 2019. But both his
admirers and detractors are baffled about this hurry in going public. Is
he convinced that Modi is losing charisma and acceptability faster than
anyone expected? But Nitish’s moves clearly reveal that he has declared
war on the Saffron Parivar. He has projected himself as the only
credible alternative to Modi. His promoters are convinced that he is as
clean as the PM. They feel his Vikas Purush tag is equally convincing if
not more than Modi’s.
Since Nitish has the advantage of rallying
the minorities behind him and attracting a load of liberal and secular
middle class votes, they have decided to demolish the PM’s core
credentials. He had venomously said, “Management is more important than
event management.” It is evident that Nitish has drawn up his field
guide well and formulated a strategy for a long-drawn-out battle. He had
made an attempt to forge a Bihar-type Mahagathbandhan (Grand Alliance)
in Assam, but failed after the Congress refused to surrender its space.
The
timing and tone, however, of the Bihar CM’s declaration are
interesting. He, along with RJD chief Lalu Prasad, sprang a surprise by
stopping the Modi juggernaut in the state by scoring a decisive victory
over the BJP in 2015. While the BJP’s defeat raised questions over its
invincibility and Modi’s popularity, it also emboldened Nitish to extend
the Bihar experiment to other parts of the country. He is aware of the
ground reality that almost all the non-BJP parties, including the Left,
are feeling insecure under Modi’s dispensation. The Congress dreads the
lethal use of government apparatus to not only topple its governments in
smaller states, but also to dig up dirty pasts of many of its senior
leaders and former and current CMs. To add fuel to the fire, the Modi
government is moving at bullet train speed to dismantle all the
institutions controlled by the Left and anti-RSS elements.
In
reality, Modi’s direct confrontation with non-BJP parties, including
some of its regional allies, is creating a favourable environment for
the creation of a political alternative. Historically, credible
substitutes have emerged against powerful personalities and their
actions, which their opponents projected as a threat to democracy.
Nitish’s plan is to portray Modi as an intolerant and arrogant leader,
who along with the RSS, his ideological mentor, poses a serious threat
to the nation’s unity and secular character. In 1977, Jaiprakash Narayan
brought all non-Congress parties together to oust Indira Gandhi after
she imposed the Emergency and suspended fundamentals rights.
Parties,
from the north to the south, sacrificed their partisan interests with
the singular aim of defeating the Congress and demolishing Indira’s
leviathan leadership. The experiment lasted for less than 30 months, as
the elements, which came together to challenge her, started to squabble.
The first ever anti-Congress initiative died an untimely death with
Indira’s triumphant return to power in 1980.
For the next nine
years, the Congress once again acquired total control over national
politics. It won most of the state polls in 1980 and later harvested a
record number of over 400 seats in the Lok Sabha after Indira Gandhi’s
assassination. Rajiv Gandhi was seen as an agent of change for a better
India. But his charm faded even earlier than his promoters expected.
Once again, corruption emerged as the ubiquitous glue to bring all the
non-Congress parties, from the CPI(M) to the BJP, occupy a single
platform to remove Rajiv and his coterie. There was a difference though.
Unlike 1977 when the Janata Party plunged into the electoral battle
without a PM candidate, the Opposition fought the 1989 election under
the leadership of Congress rebel V P Singh who enjoyed a reputation for
impeccable integrity. Their motto: defeat Rajiv, who was leading a
corrupt government.
For the next decade, Central governments were
formed on the basis of opportunistic alliances in which individuals, not
ideology, played a decisive role. But Modi changed the rules of the
political battle. Soon after winning the Gujarat elections in 2012, he
planned his move in advance to take over 7 Race Course. He tried to
bring smaller parties together, with the weak Manmohan Singh—who was
protecting and leading a corrupt government—as his target. It was for
the first time that a Lok Sabha election was turned into a Presidential
election by another name, in which Team Modi converted the war into a
struggle between the indomitable, clean development man Modi versus
Manmohan. Modi won without even a symbolic fight.
Today Nitish
wants to convert the next Lok Sabha election into a conflict between two
individuals backed by distinctive ideologies. He tried to lead the
anti-BJP coalition when he left the NDA in 2013. It failed to take off.
Even now, his resolve to forge an ATOM (alternative to Modi) has run
into hurdles posed by leaders like Uttar Pradesh CM Akhilesh Yadav, a
section of the Congress and other regional leaders. At the moment,
Nitish enjoys the full backing of Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal and West
Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee. But they can also put spanners in his works
in progress, and both are unacceptable to the Congress. Moreover, the
Congress wouldn’t like anyone to give the impression that it has
accepted Nitish over Rahul to lead the anti-Modi campaign. Rahul has the
advantage over Nitish since his party and family are still a draw
across the country. Nitish, however, has defined the contours of
confrontation for the next election. The Opposition not only wishes Modi
would lose his sheen, but also expects 900 million voters to give a
chance to another individual, ignoring the absence of an ideological
identity. For now, however, it is an uneven battle between the
omnipresent Modi, the vaguely visible Nitish and the occasionally
visible Rahul Gandhi.
prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla
Celebrating Messiah of Mhow Way to Revive Those Forgotten by Nehruvian Plutocracy
Social reincarnation is often the opportunistic face of politics.
Hence, it is no surprise that a leader, born 125 years ago, in a family
of ‘untouchables’ in Mhow, Madhya Pradesh, is being reborn as a 21st
century prophet of competitive politics for 125 crore Indians. Last
week, hardly any leader worth his salt failed to remind ‘We, the People
of India’ about Dr Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar’s overwhelming contribution in
restoring social equilibrium in a caste-infected nation. PM Narendra
Modi flew down to Mhow last Thursday. Sonia Gandhi addressed a massive
rally there a few days earlier. Needless to say, the media was
predictable beneficiary of the government’s largesse unlike the target
audience that represented an unsung Indian class revolution.
Undoubtedly,
Dr Ambedkar was of a different league. He was an elitist in attire but a
sanguine social reformist in words and wisdom. Ideologically, he wasn’t
a Congressman. After participating in the freedom struggle, he floated
the Independent Labour Party and contested the Lok Sabha elections in
1952. But he lost to the Congress candidate Narayan Kajrolkar. PM
Jawaharlal Nehru had included the Dalit firebrand in independent India’s
first Cabinet. In the pecking order, however, Ambedkar wasn’t perceived
as the cardinal leader of Dalit interests. Babu Jagjivan Ram, a low
caste Congressman from Bihar, was placed three notches above him. For
the next quarter century, the Congress went on to project ‘Babuji’ as
the messiah of the socially discriminated until 1977, when he broke away
to float his party, Congress for Democracy, which later merged with the
Janata Party.
Today, the political panorama, including the
Congress and BJP, has appropriated Ambedkar as its ideological deity.
For more than 50 years, none of them thought of him as a personage who
deserved the Bharat Ratna—21 awardees came before him until he was
conferred with the award in 1990, when VP Singh was the Prime Minister.
Ironically, both the national parties have today scored ahead of the
smaller parties, including the BSP, which thrive and survive in his name
in the National Ambedkar Worship Exhibition.
Ever since Modi
became the PM in 2014, he has made Ambedkar the fulcrum of his strategy
of political expansionism and vote acquisition. Since the BJP was
perceived as a party dominated by Brahmanical moorings, Modi conceived
an idea to transform the untouchables as India’s most touchable of
identities. He directed all ministries to plan special events throughout
the year to celebrate Ambedkar’s 125th birth anniversary, forcing other
parties to become also-rans. He led his ministers, chief ministers and
party cadres on the social media to project Baba Saheb as India’s most
revered statesman.
The revival of the Ambedkar cult reflects the
growing realisation among all political parties that the Messiah from
Mhow continues to be the most powerful figure in winning electoral
battles. None of the political parties in the west or north of the
country can complete its electoral manifesto without dropping Ambedkar’s
name. Even the RSS is competing with parties in promoting Ambedkar as a
reformer, forgetting the fact that he was against Hinduism and also
favoured Muslims. Sadly, the Ambedkar legacy is being exploited only in
the name of reservation. If one devotes the time to scan through his
speeches and books, Ambedkar was much more than a mere promoter of caste
quotas in Parliament, state Assemblies and government jobs. His
admirers are only minimising his stature as the person who believed in
the modernisation of Indian culture and reducing large land holdings so
that poor farmers could prosper. He argued for a larger role for big
industry. He also warned the Congress leadership and Nehru against
supporting China’s bid for a permanent seat in the UN Security Council.
Instead, he wanted India to fight for herself—a battle which India is
now fighting to lose.
Ambedkar’s idea of reservation was aimed at
making Dalits stakeholders in the national narrative rather than
existing as ornamental glyphs of socialist symbology. Though India has
just about 15 per cent Dalits among its legislators and babus in its
ranks of governance today, they are hardly equal partners in running the
affairs of the state. Even 66 years after the establishment of the
Constitution drafted by Baba Saheb, Dalits are treated as outsiders even
if they have become, in name, insiders through reservation. The vested
interests in the current political system dangle the reservation policy
as a carrot to Dalits, thus denying them the right to become part of the
real establishment. For example, no Dalit has ever become the PM,
finance minister, external affairs minister or education minister of
India. Jagjivan Ram almost became the PM in 1977, when Morarji Desai had
to resign.
But a combination of Brahmanical forces within the Janata Party, along with the Communists, opposed his elevation.
Not
more than a dozen Dalit leaders have risen to the post of chief
minister in the past six decades. Though Dalits in the Indian Civil
Services form just 15 per cent, very few of them have became chief
secretaries or Director Generals of Police. Not a single Dalit has made
it to the post of Union Cabinet Secretary. Above all, Dalits are
unwanted companions or guests at social and private functions hosted by
upper caste liberals and eidolons. Rarely is a Mayawati, Ram Vilas
Paswan or Jitan Ram Manjhi invited to cosy dinners organised by the
chatterati and corporate caliphs.Inexplicably, while the deification of
Baba Saheb is becoming a glamorous hobby, his idea of egalitarian India
is being lacerated. As the Father of the Constitution, Ambedkar has
acquired a much bigger stature than the Father of the Nation, Mahatma
Gandhi, who is remembered less and less as a Dalit champion. Ambedkar’s
excessive dominance in the political credo, however, has eclipsed Nehru
more than Gandhi. Hence, most Nehruvians have refrained from hailing him
as the reformer who influenced the course of modern India. The Festival
of Ambedkar, being celebrated by Modi and his party, is definitely
meant to revive luminaries, who have been forgotten or dumped by the
Nehruvian plutocracy.
prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla
Modi's Message is Loud and Clever: While in Govt, Work for India and Dream for India
Advice is just a pseudonym for infiltration, especially in administration. There was a time when videshi was considered the most effective panacea for all ills plaguing Indian governance. However, Prime Minister Narendra Modi perceives anyone with foreign connections in ministries as a devious influence peddler. Last week, following instructions from the PMO, the Health Ministry embarked on a purge of over 150 consultants who were advising it on various health-related issues. Most of them have been working in the government for many years, and are handsomely financed by prestigious global organisations like WHO and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
A large number of these have been involved in programmes that monitor the spread of HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis in India. Modi’s choice of the Health Ministry as his first arena to sweep away foreign influence in the government has upset and disrupted a well-knit system which permeates government agencies, influence policies and whose final beneficiaries are its financiers. The PM may be talking about Invest-in-India to Make-in-India, but he is not in a mood to take any advice from anyone other than those he feels has only India’s interests at heart. During the past 23 months in office, he has welcomed the largest number of foreign entrepreneurs, professionals and other icons than any of his illustrious predecessors at 7 Race Course. Yet, he has refrained from inducting foreign-educated advisors or experts sponsored by the West in key positions.
He has been closely monitoring the role of foreign-funded NGOs and other consulting agencies, which were counseling various ministries on myriad social, economic, environmental and health issues. He instructed trusted officials in the Ministry of Home, Finance, the CBI and RAW to review the role of over 100 such outfits, which had found ingress into the government. According to Home Ministry sources, foreign-sponsored consultants were not only feeding data and exclusive information to other international agencies through their participation in global seminars and conferences, but also through various research-based NGOs in India. Some of these individuals and organisations were also directly or indirectly involved with those who have been hounding Modi since 2002. To add fat to the fire, key officials of these bodies were the ones who lobbied in the US and the West to deny Modi a visa.
Now, the government has drawn up for special scrutiny, a list of over 700 foreign-linked or -funded consultants working with ministries such as Power, Finance, Environment, Education, NITI Aayog, Roads and Transport, Agriculture, Non-Conventional Energy, Mining, Petroleum and Natural Gas and Defence Production . Even some of the prominent PSUs have been identified for special screening, thanks to their association with foreign consulting firms. The PMO is convinced that most development and infrastructural projects have been delayed for a decade and more, only because of the convoluted spins given by these firms to ensure that India will continue to depend heavily on imports. For example, during the early 1980s when Indira Gandhi was prime minister, a blueprint to make India fully self reliant in petroleum products by 1990 was finalised. Yet, even after 35 years, the country spends billions of dollars on importing crude oil. Even though the Health Ministry has the largest number of foreign-affiliated advisors, India still suffers from the maximum number of diseases and reels under an inefficient health administration. The environment ministry was home to consultants from the World Wide Fund of India, while experts from Britain’s DFID worked for both ministries of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation until December. Yet both the ministries haven’t been able to get rid of parasites. During one of the numerous ministerial reviews by the PMO, it was discovered that outside experts were hanging on to their jobs much beyond their contractual terms, on one pretext or the other. None of the senior officials or even the ministers could offer credible excuses for those still clinging on to the government. It was decided that the Home Ministry will do a thorough review of each one of them.
The Ministry later on hinted that most of these consultants are tailoring their reports for ministers and bureaucrats to influence policies in such a way that it promotes the commercial interests of their parent agencies. For example, the government suspects that the quantum of the HIV/AIDS infected population in India was artificially raised to get, not only more funds from the Indian government but also to help specific pharma companies manufacturing medicines that treat AIDS. Highly exaggerated statistics on HIV victims has brought India a bad image in the world. What upset the Modi government was the inability of these consultants to reverse India’s negative image on hygiene, environmental protection, clean energy and inclusive education. Instead, the very institutions, which had drafted these experts into the government, have been playing anti-India roles on international platforms.
The reality is that the Indian political leadership has been suffering from an inferiority complex since Independence. Since various prime ministers from Nehru to Manmohan Singh saw it as their mission to establish their imprints and road maps for faster economic development, they laterally inducted large number of experts hired by international agencies to assist the government. Manmohan even packed the Planning Commission with a record number of foreign consultants soon after taking over as prime minister in 2004. This led to furious protests from the Left, forcing him to abandon the move. The Finance Ministry has always been the preferred destination for foreign-educated economists. They have been following the revolving door principle. Almost all its Chief Economic Advisors have sometime or the other been on the rolls of foreign institutions that include universities. They come to serve India and go back to the West after the government, which appointed them was ousted. Numerous Parliamentarians and others have raised questions about the undesirable influence of these money mandarins on India’s fiscal and monetary policies, which they think are guided by the ideological fancy of their permanent habitat—the US. The ongoing purge of foreign elements from the government and other institutions appears to be part of Modi’s nationalist agenda. His message is loud and clever: while in government Work for India and Dream for India.
prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com
Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla
Any Attempt to Kill the Spirit Behind the Slogan Bharat Mata ki Jai is Anti-national
India’s first PM Jawahar Lal Nehru discovered real India when he
wrote his 595-page book Discovery of India in 1946. Written during his
four-year stay in Ahmed Nagar Fort Jail, Nehru spoke about India’s
ancient civilisation, culture and the greatness that was polluted by
invaders from outside. Four decades later, Shyam Benegal, a genuine
liberal, wrote and directed the historical drama Bharat Ek Khoj based on
Nehru’s book in which Roshan Seth, a Nehruvian and Doon school alumnus,
played the role of the former PM. The first episode was titled Bharat
Mata ki Jai (BMKJ). The first scene showed a group of villagers
welcoming Nehru to a public gathering with chants of BMKJ. When Nehru
asked his audience if they knew the meaning of the slogan and whose
victory they were aspiring for, initially no one had an answer. Finally,
one of the young farmers said Bharat Mata meant the dharati (land),
which was their mother. But Nehru refused to accept that it was just the
earth beneath their feet; he said Bharat Mata referred to the whole
country, to its mountains, rivers, sky and seas and, most importantly,
to its people. It was the only in the victory of its people that Bharat
could find its victory, he said.
But having said that, he chose
to end his famous Tryst with Destiny speech at Red Fort in August 1947
with Jai Hind, not Bharat Mata ki Jai. Despite being one of India’s
leading freedom fighters, Nehru chose to ignore the fact that the slogan
had been coined by those seeking freedom from British rule under the
leadership of the Indian National Congress, and that people of all
faiths proudly chanted it during protests against the British. Powerful
freedom fighters like Liaquat Ali had to face the wrath of brutal
British controlled police for shouting BMKJ and Vande Matram.
That
was then. Seventy years after Nehru wrote his book, his disciples and
progeny are still engaged in an exercise to discover the idea of India
and define the space and importance of BMKJ. Not only political parties,
even civil society leaders, Bollywood icons, writers, social
media-savvy religious gurus and organisations are fiercely fighting to
either own or disown BMKJ. For every champion of Bharat Mata, there is
one who feels pride in declaring himself or herself anti-national by
refusing to chant the slogan. Indeed, it has become the biggest issue
dividing the country along communal and political lines.
With
elections becoming a permanent feature of every calendar year, India’s
idea- and issue-starved political parties have made nationalism (ours vs
theirs) the main plank for the coming polls. While the Sangh Parivar
led by PM Narendra Modi has made the chanting of BMKJ the only credible
test of one’s loyalty to India, its adversaries insist that undiluted
faith in the Constitution of India is the solitary symbol of patriotism.
Perhaps, it is the over-enthusiastic imposition of BMKJ by the Sangh
Parivar that has contributed to the equally-aggressive opposition of its
detractors.
The battle for grabbing a nationalist trophy acquired
religious overtones last week when leading Islamic seminary Darul Uloom
Deoband issued a fatwa asking Muslims not to chant Bharat Mata ki Jai,
calling it un-Islamic. The same seminary also advised madrasas across
the country “to hoist the Tricolour and celebrate Independence Day and
teach students about the Indian freedom struggle and the country’s
original spirit of unity in diversity”. Earlier, sensing growing
resistance to BMKJ, the RSS had clarified that people should not be
forced to participate to chant the slogan. But now, with the anti-BMKJ
missive emanating from the Islamist organisation, hard-core Hindu
outfits have been quick to question the nationalism of the minorities.
It’s
ironic that a slogan like BMKJ, which was created to unite the nation,
is now polarising the country. Ever since Independence, political
parties, social organisations, NGOs and RSS-affiliated outfits have
chanted Bharat Mata Ki Jai at their functions, without any interference
or protests from any quarters. Over a decade ago, there was some
brouhaha over the singing of Vande Mataram, which was met with
recriminatory (and what some would call threatening) responses like
“Agar is desh mein rahna hoga, Vande Matram kehna hoga (If you want to
live in this country, you shall sing Vande Mataram)”. But never have we
seen such a confrontationist atmosphere in the country as we see today.
Indeed, Vande Mataram is sung at many official functions without any
protest from the audience.
This leads one to believe that the
current opposition to BMKJ is aimed at bringing all Sangh Parivar forces
to one platform and converting the debate into an issue of threat to
freedom of expression. Those who oppose the slogan claim that nowhere
does the Constitution provide for the invocation of BMKJ. A coalition of
liberals, neo-communalists and Leftists has been formed to defeat any
attempt by the ruling political dispensation to dismantle the current
eco-system which hardly recognises the importance of national flag,
national geographical identity and judiciary. This group invokes
selective and subjective use of the Constitution to protect its
political perks and imposes its personal choices on the rest of the
country. It swears by the Constitution when it serves its ideological
convictions. It has no problem if the National Anthem is sung at every
function attended by the President of India, or at the beginning and end
of the Parliament session.
But when the Constitution talks about
prohibition, the same people see it as a threat to their fundamental
right to consume what they will. They support a judicial verdict that’s
aligned to their choices but hit the streets if the courts deliver
judgments based on constitutional provisions that disrupt their
lifestyle. Undoubtedly, the foreign-educated current crop of
intellectuals, media stars, political leaders and elitist business
leaders have brilliant minds. But they are only half educated when it
comes to the idea of the motherland. BMKJ was not a gift from any
narrow-minded sectarian Hindu leader or organisation. Bharat Mata ki Jai
was the most successful non-violent verbal weapon forged by a
freedom-starved crowd which helped end the 200-year-old British rule and
sent the English packing. Any attempt to kill the spirit behind the
slogan runs the risk of being labelled anti-national. BMKJ is just an
assertion of independence from slavery of every colour and nothing more.
prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla
As Parties Up the Glam Quotient, Ideology May Become Fading Star of Indian Politics
Politics and entertainment have long been brothers—both require a
measure of magnetism, a talent for self-promotion and an instinctive
feel for media manipulation. No wonder, come election time, the world of
politics likes to pull in the stars and the trappings of stardom.
Ideological icons fall by the wayside as glamazons from the world of
cinema and sports clamber onto political bandwagons for electioneering,
and political campaigns morph into entertainment shows. This year
promises to be no different. For the elections in five states, even
mighty leaders like Narendra Modi and Congress president Sonia Gandhi
have despatched their best hunters to scout for cine stars and sports
icons as well as literati and chatterati who can expand their share of
the political market. In situations where the party has no more than a
symbolic presence in the region or state, local celebs, who’re au
courant with regional politics, have been roped in to move the
electorate.
Last week, the BJP announced that it was fielding
former cricketer S Sreesanth as its candidate for Thiruvananthapuram.
Since Sreesanth has become known more for match-fixing and dancing than
for his medium pace bowling, he was banned for life from playing cricket
by the BCCI in 2013. But, clearly, the ruling party at the Centre
believes that he is still capable of bowling out its rivals in a state
where it’s struggling to open an account.
Now, Tamil Nadu has been
dominated by screen stars for the past 50 years, as was undivided
Andhra Pradesh (with NT Rama Rao, who was as successful in the political
arena as he was in cinema, along with Jayaprada, Chiranjeevi, Mohan
Babu, Kota Srinivas Rao and, more recently, Pawan Kalyan). In Tamil
Nadu, the state’s biggest film stars created political parties for
personal ambition rather than ideology. It was easy, as the charisma of
MG Ramachandran, Karunanidhi and Jayalalithaa easily moved the masses to
bring them to power even as many others turned out to be also-rans. Of
late, both the Congress and BJP have been struggling to persuade Tamil
filmstars like Vijaykanth, who formed the DMDK in 2005, to join them as
an ally to increase their political share, but with little success.
In
West Bengal and Assam, too, the parties have identified famous persons
from sports, art, culture, cinema and society to help them with their
electoral mission. The BJP, for instance, has decided to field a member
of the Subhas Chandra Bose family against CM Mamata Banerjee. This
despite the Bose family having nothing to do with the Sangh Parivar
except for the fact that Modi went out of the way to make some secret
documents public and hosted the Bose family at 7 RCR.
But then,
all political parties without exception have been diluting their
declared ideology over the past few decades. The process began with the
catapulting of Indira Gandhi to the top in 1969 when she took over the
Congress after the first split. The khadi dhoti- and Gandhi cap-wearing
leaders were purged and a new crop of people bearing personal loyalty to
Indira was drafted into the party. Though the Congress still swore by
secularism and Garibi Hatao, Indira was seen as the Congress. Later on,
Dev Kant Barooah, the portly and balding party president, redefined the
party’s ideology by giving a slogan: Indira is India. Congress leaders
of the time insisted that the personality of their leader reflected what
the party stood for: socialism, secularism and democracy. Indira
Gandhi, for sure, didn’t depend on glamour or corporate leaders to win
an election. In fact, the joke at the time was that even a lamp post
could win an election if it was backed by her.
It was Rajiv Gandhi
who introduced glamour and a corporate culture into the Congress. A
natural charmer, he inducted technocrats Arun Singh and Arun Nehru into
politics, took India into the 21st century through technology and
responsive government, and gave a new twist to Congress’ ideology. But
he also relied on glamour from sports and Bollywood. He brought his
friend Amitabh Bachchan in to defeat the formidable Hemwati Nandan
Bahuguna. Later on, biggies like Rajesh Khanna, Sunil Dutt, Raj Babbar,
Govinda and Ramya from Karnataka too came in to fight elections on
behalf of the party. The Congress was also the first to field former
cricketer Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi as its candidate from Bhopal (but he
lost). The trend continues till today, with over a dozen filmstars and
sportspersons holding key positions at the Centre or the states.
With
Congress using the glam quotient (GQ) to maul its powerful leaders, the
BJP also decided to fall back on its fair and lovely supporters. Lal
Krishna Advani, a film buff and cricket enthusiast, opened the party
doors for both film and sports stars. He brought in Dharmendra,
Shatrughan Sinha, Vinod Khanna, Hema Malini from Bollywood and
cricketers Navjot Sidhu, Chetan Chauhan and Kirti Azad for their
vote-catching capacity. Now the Modi-Shah duo is taking forward the
strategy of using GQ to bolster the party’s electoral chances.
The
GQ bug has even hit regional parties like the Trinamool Congress, Biju
Janata Dal, Samajwadi Party and, specially, Aam Aadmi Party, which has
mastered the art of roping in the maximum number of local and national
icons for expanding its base.
With each party fighting to maximise
its GQ, the Indian political establishment has the globe’s largest
number of movers and shakers from the glamorous world working for it.
With over 40 prominent film personalities and some 20 sportspersons,
India is leading the world followed by the Philippines and the US. The
UK, the mother of democracy, has been able to absorb less than a dozen
leaders from non-political background. In Europe too, political parties
rarely rope in film stars or sportspersons to win elections for them as
they feel that the shelf life of the bold and beautiful paratroopers is
limited.
Back home in India, however, the story is quite
different. This despite the fact that, with the exception of some
regional parties, the nation has seen all its ‘political celebrities’
vanishing without leaving any trace of an ideological contribution. If
this continues and parties fail to create credible, acceptable leaders
from their shrinking base of committed cadres, ideologically led Indian
politics will be replaced with musings of egoist leaders and
ideologically bankrupt-but-highly successful stars from the film and
sports arena rather than the real world of the politics of heat and
dust.
prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla
Development Card BJP's Best Bet to Stop the Kashmir Valley from Drifting
Experiments in political engineering can throw up strange results, as seen in Jammu and Kashmir. In January last year, keeping aside its ‘non-negotiable’ nationalistic ideology, the BJP decided to strike an experimental deal with the pro-separatist Peoples’ Democratic Party of the late Mufti Mohammad Sayeed. Now, after 14 months, the BJP seems to have discovered something rotten in both the taste and odour of the power it has consumed in the state. The experiment of fusion politics, mixing nationalism with separatism, has proven to be a recipe for disaster. Ever since the Mufti died two months ago, his successor Mehbooba Mufti and the BJP leadership have been holding both public and secret parleys to revive the dead alliance. Officially, they have been exuding confidence about the formation of the new coalition government, and yet both have been talking about the lack of a confidence-building road map for a political reunion.
Any alliance made on the basis of convenience rather than conviction, collapses sooner than later. In a state like Jammu and Kashmir, where a love for money and romance with extra-territorial ideas dictate the political narrative, any formation which threatens established social and political order is bound to fail. The BJP has been unsuccessful in imposing its brand of politics and societal practices on the PDP, which survives by supporting and feeding those who oppose the Valley’s integration with India.
The tug of war between the PDP and BJP is not just for grabbing proprietary right to a few power plants or any special package. It is a confrontation of two ideologies and the idea of India. Mehbooba wants J&K to remain emotionally separate from India while the BJP wants to erase all legal, social and economic hurdles and make the Valley a part of the national mainstream.
By joining hands with the PDP, both Prime Minister Narendra Modi and BJP Chief Amit Shah expected to restore the secular character of the Valley. They thought they could push the state government to facilitate the safe return of the Kashmiri Pundits, with full liberty to do business and participate in the electoral process. The Centre linked the entire economic package and phased withdrawal of the armed forces with the rehabilitation of the Kashmir Pundits and the tightening of the noose around separatists. But Mehbooba is no Mufti, who could survive on his own charisma and credibility. Indeed, she has acquired political legitimacy only by pandering to the sentiments and tears of those whose relatives have died while participating in attacks on civilians and Indian Army personnel. She has realised that by staying with the BJP, she will lose her traditional support base.
The current constitutional crisis in the Valley is also a manifestation of the confrontation between two political dynasties led by Mehbooba and Omar Abdullah. Both of them are competing with each other in painting the BJP as a threat to the autonomy and welfare of the Kashmiri people. Both of them are determined to marginalise the role of national parties such as the Congress and BJP. While the Abdullahs have been a part of national politics, Mehbooba has always confined herself to the Valley. The Abdullahs also enjoy the support of a small section of the Hindu minority in the Valley and Jammu region while Mufti survives only on Muslim backing in the Valley.
It is, however, the complete failure of both the Congress and BJP to erode the core constituency of the National Conference (NC) and PDP. Even after 69 years of Independence, a substantial majority of Kashmiris are hostile to the idea of calling themselves Indian. The Congress has ruled the state for 12 years alone and over 50 years as part of a coalition or with the support of a regional party. The Abdullahs ran the state for over two decades. If one includes 10 years of Congress-backed NC rebel Bakshi Ghulam Mohammad, the NC was in command of the sensitive state for almost 30 years.
Pakistan has never accepted the reality of Jammu and Kashmir as part of the Indian Republic, and till 1990, has supported and financed the separatists. When it failed to destabilise the state, it started armed infiltration and used local operatives to bomb and kill civilians and army personnel. The Centre’s attempt to use governors for neutralising extreme elements also failed. Even the current governor Narendra Nath Vohra, a favourite of every party, has not succeeded in diluting the impact of the separatists by ensuring proper development of the state by using his charm over the local government. On the other hand, Pakistan’s objective was to halt the economic development of the state and sow the seeds of terror. It has succeeded. In spite of liberal money flow from New Delhi, the state’s GDP rose by less than 1 per cent during 2014-15 down from over 13 per cent the previous year. The lack of development and misuse of funds have generated more unemployment and have pushed the youth into the hands of anti-national elements.
But development has never been a glue that’s bonded ideologically opposed political parties. With Pakistan in a mood to talk, the best solution open for the BJP is to play the development card, treat separatists as enemies of the state, and appoint a governor who bothers far more about greater governance rather than his own survival. In the past seven decades, instead of coming closer to India, the Valley has drifted into the black hole of politics of opportunism and convenience. If matters remain the way they are, the black hole will seal itself and darkness will endlessly prevail.
PS: Last week I wrote about why Modi adores Sri Sri. Last week, Art of Living Guru took to Twitter to prove his worldwide acceptability. He tweeted twice as follows:
19/03/16, 1:35 am: The World Culture Festival had 767,436 locations in 188 countries viewing the webcast according to our webcast partner, Livestream’s report.
The social media partner reported 1.4 bn impressions on Twitter & 30 mn engagements on Facebook during the World Culture Festival.
For Modi, visibility on social media is an accelerator that keeps him going.
prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla
For Brand Modi, Endorsing New Age Gurus Tiny Price to Win Over Classes and Masses Alike
There’s no business like the godmen business, they say, with no fixed
working hours, exotic travel, much public adulation, and no need for a
shave every morning.
No wonder, saints and self-styled godpersons
have been around from time immemorial, most of them symbols of
sacrifice and wisdom. Some made mountains and caves their natural
habitat. Others lived in palaces and forts, as advisers to the throne,
with kings and queens running to them for salvation and solutions.
Today,
in the 21st century, we still have gurus and preachers of all shades
and faiths, and with solid community, caste or religion support. If
yesterday, they were courted by royalty, today they enjoy the patronage
and protection of the kings of polity. For, they represent vote banks
and mould public opinion. From Punjab to Kerala, from Gujarat to Assam,
the nation is dotted with men and women who act as spiritual advisers to
the ruling classes and a source of inspiration for the masses. In the
process, some of them acquire the image of kingmakers or influencers of
government policies.
Consider Sri Sri Ravi Shankar and Baba
Ramdev, who have done some admirable work in their respective fields.
Their ever-growing visibility and clout in the current political
dispensation is an indication of the renewed importance of the guru in
the establishment. Both have easy access to the nation’s high and
mighty; both have followers across political parties. Corporates,
Bollywood stars, even diplomats, stand in awe of them and touch their
feet.
Even Prime Minister Narendra Modi is not indifferent to
their lure. Indeed, the duo provides him easy access to two extreme ends
of the Indian social milieu and a huge audience that the Prime Minister
loves to engage with. Last week, when Modi chose to attend, and
address, the World Cultural Festival (WCF) on the banks of the Yamuna in
New Delhi, it reinforced the relevance, effectiveness, acceptability
and credibility of India’s saintly symbolism. By spending over three
hours at the venue, Modi left no one in doubt that his faith in Sri Sri
and his Art of Living (AoL) foundation was unshakable. Not only did Modi
and his ministers dismiss with contempt all criticism of the event,
they ensured that the entire might of the state was mobilised to make
WCF a grand success. Modi, in fact, called WCF a Kumbh of all cultures.
Harking back to history, the Prime Minister addressed Sri Sri as
Parampujniya Guruji (most revered) and said, “This is the Kumbh Mela of
culture. Through Art of Living, the world has got to know about India. I
remember a reception by the Art of Living family in Mongolia. We are
all linked not only by economy but also by culture.”
Much like
the maharajas of yore, Modi clearly understands the utility of the
new-age gurus. Known for his attention to detail, the Prime Minister
knows that both the AoL chief and Ramdev represent the pulse of two
major social groups. Sri Sri Ravi Shankar connects him with an upmarket,
global following. Indeed, among Sri Sri’s disciples and admirers are
the chatterati and upper middle class of all parts of India as well as
leaders from the Western world and Muslim-dominated West Asia. He also
has a huge following in South India. Above all, his organisation
possesses huge skills and expertise in mobilising large numbers of
people in many parts of the world. Given that Modi has been targeting
the Indian diaspora and people of influence during his foreign visits,
he finds in AoL a natural ally. Ever since Modi took over as Prime
Minister in 2014 (when Sri Sri was one of the few spiritual leaders to
come out in his support), AoL has been connecting him with many
international leaders. Though Ravi Shankar’s posturing on Indo-Pak
relations may be at variance with that of the Prime Minister and Sangh
Parivar, Modi has allowed the AoL guru to pursue people-to-people
contact with Pakistan. AoL also has powerful connections in Jammu and
Kashmir, where it is considered to be the most secular link with the
ruling party at the Centre.
If Ravi Shankar is useful to the
Prime Minister owing to his connection with the world and liberal India,
Baba Ramdev delivers to Modi the rural and urban poor and middle class.
The Baba, who belongs to a backward class and has made ‘Everything
Desi’ his mantra for success, is one of the rare spiritual leaders with
hardly any formal education and training. The 50-year-old guru started
his Patanjali Institute to bring yoga to the common man and, within a
period of two decades, has acquired over 25 million followers across the
country. His yoga camps are attended by over 10,000 people daily. While
Sri Sri promotes breathing as an instrument of wellness, Ramdev
emphasises on physical exercises. In the past few years, Modi has been a
frequent visitor to Ramdev’s ashram in Haridwar and has always invited
the Baba for any important official function held in connection with
spirituality.
There may be a connection of conviction between
Ramdev and Sri Sri and the Prime Minister, but critics believe the
relationship is based on an understanding of mutual advantage. Modi
detractors have already charged the NDA government with doling out huge
financial and other concessions to both the gurus. For the New Delhi
event, they point out, the Union government not only gave a massive
grant, but it also deployed the Army to create the infrastructure at the
venue. Now, with AoL beginning the sale of daily use products like
mineral water and toothpaste, their suspicions are even more heightened.
On his part, Ramdev has never hidden his commercial interests. His
swadeshi Pathanjali has taken on well-established multinationals selling
FMCGs and hawks energy drinks, beauty creams and yoga DVDs. Various
government agencies, including the defence ministry, are among his
clients.
Given their huge fan following and resources, both AoL
and Patanjali’s dependence on the government is quite baffling and
erodes their credibility. But for Brand Modi, it is a tiny price to pay
for the endorsement of Sri Sri and Ramdev who mesmerise a substantive
section of Indians, here and abroad.
prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla
Assembly Polls Will Decide Which Way the Fortune Cookie Crumbles for the Big Five
(From left) Narendra Modi, Amit Shah, J Jayalalithaa, M Karunanadhi and Mamata Banerjee
Opportunism trumps ideology, come election time. The axiom appears to
be metamorphosising into a fact in the ongoing countdown for the
Assembly elections. During the next few weeks, over 170 million voters
in Assam, Kerala, West Bengal, Tamil Nadu and Puducherry will vote and
elect 824 new leaders. But, even before a single nomination has been
filed in any of the states, political parties and their supreme leaders
have begun looking for new allies and causes for seeking a legitimate
mandate. Since politics is the art of converting symbolic-egotistic
impossibility into a remunerative possibility, the leaders are working
on a negative agenda, where the others’ defeat is more important than
their own victory.
In Tamil Nadu, the Karunanidhi clan wants to
dislodge current Chief Minister J Jayalalithaa by forging an alliance
with those who have hardly anything in common with the DMK, including
caste or religion. In West Bengal, the Reds have gone forth and merged
with the tricolour to defeat Mamata Didi. Never before has a formal
alliance between the Marxists and Congress taken place in the state just
to trounce a ruling political deity. In Kerala, the BJP is out to
cohabit with caste-led small parties only to stop both the United
Democratic Front and the Left Democratic front from grabbing power. The
BJP doesn’t and can’t become the ruling party in the state but, in
anticipation of a photofinish outcome, it wants to win at least a couple
of seats and thereby play kingmaker. In Assam too, the BJP is confident
of forming its first legitimately elected government in the Northeast
by polarising the entire electorate along regional and communal lines.
It has been able to instal a rebel Congress government in Arunanchal
Pradesh by breaking it. In Assam too, the BJP has split the Congress by
admitting a large number of partymen during the past few months.
A
prerequisite to winning the battle for ballots is a meticulous
deployment of logical contours and formations. Hence, breaking parties
matters more than projecting an alternative leader or an agenda for
governance. From Thiruvananthapuram to Guwahati, thus, political parties
have unleashed deal-makers to strike visible and invisible deals with
caste dons, religious gurus, corporate promoters and local
opinion-makers to market their parties. But none of them have put forth
even a strategy that’s synchronised with its ideology or leadership for
seeking the mandate.
The outcome of the coming elections has
serious implications for five individuals: Prime Minister Narendra Modi,
BJP president Amit Shah, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Jayalalithaa, DMK
chief Karunanidhi, and West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee. All
of them have points to prove. But the stake is especially high for the
BJP, which is still battling the dilemma of whether or not to fight the
elections in the name of the Prime Minister. Of the 824 Assembly seats,
the BJP won less than double digits during the 2011 state elections.
Riding on the massive Modi wave, however, the party led over its rivals
in 114 Assembly segments in the May 2014 Lok Sabha elections. Currently,
the BJP has the highest number of about 1,000 MLAs in all the states
put together; that is some 100 more than the Congress.
But the
BJP doesn’t expect to form the government in any of the states except
Assam. It is neither a ruling party nor an influential group in any of
these states. After its ignonimous defeat in Delhi and Bihar, Shah and
his team need to reverse the downward turn in the electoral fortunes of
the party. The beating in the two northern states was seen as a mark of
the diminishing appeal of the Prime Minister and the fallibility of Shah
as master strategist.
But the saffron party doesn’t have a
single local leader in any one of the four states, much like Bihar and
Delhi. In fact, it is confronted with formidable local leaders. Even a
79-year-old chief minister like Tarun Gagoi is giving the BJP a serious
fight in Assam after remaining in power for just over a decade. Though
the BJP has formally forged an alliance with the Asom Gana Parishad and
appointed a new state party chief, it is still depending on the Congress
rebels to give it a majority. Buoyed by winning seven of the 14 Lok
Sabha seats in 2014, the BJP is confident of forming a government on its
own. The party led in 79 of the 126 Assembly segments during the Lok
Sabha elections although it had won barely five seats in 2011. Its share
of popular votes rose tremendously from 11.45 per cent in 2011 to
36.50 per cent in 2014.
According to party managers, both Modi
and Shah have decided to move manpower and resources to Assam and win it
at any cost. Though it has indirectly projected Union Minister of State
for Sports Sarbananda Sonawal as its chief ministerial candidate
against Gogoi, it dreads an unprecedented backlash from the Muslim
community, which determines the outcome in about 30 seats. The
Muslim-dominated AIUDF won 16 of the minority seats and led in 24
segments in 2014. The Congress party is already trying to strike a
strategic alliance with the Badruddin Ajmal-led AIUDF to defeat the
BJP+AGP combination. West Bengal’s case is more dire. There, the BJP is
faced with the same threat of polarisation of votes along religious
lines to prevent the division of anti-Mamata votes. The party has only
one MLA in the current Assembly and has not been able to groom a
state-level leader even after leading in 24 Assembly segments. In
southern states, the party is conspicuous by its token presence outside
the state Assemblies.
Well, 2016 is not 2014 when Narendra
Damodardas Modi was taller than all the other leaders put together. In
2016, he may still be the tallest leader individually, but the BJP has
failed to create anyone who can stand up to the likes of Mamata,
Jayalalithaa and Nitish Kumar. Going by the early signals, both Mamata
and Jayalalithaa are likely to romp home with handsome victories while
the Left may stage a comeback in Kerala. For the BJP to prove to the
country that the Modi-Shah partnership wasn’t a one-knock wonder, it
needs to beat or at least repeat its 2014 Lok Sabha performance in terms
of vote share.
prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla
Spends more time on the road than at work. The minister who thinks most
out of the box. A risk-taker who changes the rule if it obstructs his
agenda. Has activated jammed highway projects, cleared new ones and
upgraded existing ones— a spend of over Rs. 2 lakh crore till 2019. On
an average, about 20 km of road being added to the network daily.
Changed road taxation policy, toll collection laws, made waterways
transport a viable business. Established better coordination with state
governments. (9/10) 
2. Dharmendra Pradhan, 47, MoS (Independent Charge) for Petroleum and Natural Gas
Despite frail health, the most frequent flier in Modi’s cabinet, and not
just to glamorous destinations. With 5.1 million Twitter followers,
one of the few mantris who remain cyber-connected with not just
diplomats but also with ordinary Indians. Resolves issues instantly.
Created a world record by safely getting back the most number of
captives from countries in IS-occupied territories. Though it is the PM
who calls the shots on global affairs, Swaraj is his most effective
ambassador. (8/10)
This low-profile ministry lands in the news only when terror attacks or
Naxal violence happens. Gets no credit since secretive tactics make
victories classified. Using a comprehensive information network, has
aborted many terror conspiracies hatched across the border. Infiltrators
prevented from striking in India. Brought down Naxal attacks. Police
reform process, stuck in budget constraints, restarted. Made
Centre-state relations smooth. Most accessible minister to BJP workers. (7.5/10)
5. Smriti Irani, 40, Minister for Human Resource Development
6. Prakash Javadekar, 65, Minister of State (IC) for Environment, Forest
7. Piyush Goyal, 52, Minister of State (Independent Charge) for Power, Coal, 
Has used every trick in the book to bring railways on track and convert
it into a corporate-style public sector entity. Mantra: use technology
over human resources to make the infamously accident-prone Indian
Railways safe. His Swachh Rail emphasis on selected, high-traffic
stations paying off. The ministry has given big orders for new rolling
stock and other equipment to private entrepreneurs. No safe clean rail
journey for rural travellers. Instead of finding new sources of revenue,
resorted to raising passengers and freight fares. (5/10)
9. Arun Jaitley, 63, Minister for Finance, and Information & Broadcasting
NDA’s worst performer. Despite India’s growth of over 7 per cent,
agriculture growing at less than 1 per cent. No proper administrative
and fiscal system for farmers. Over 35 per cent of the country is
drought-stricken, but this farmer is wandering in the wilderness. No new
reform introduced. No future road map. This list may be
disagreeable to those for whom publicity, and not perception, decides
the parameters of performance. But then, that’s what objectivity about
subjects is all about. (3/10)
