Floods Have Made Bond between J & K ... Power & Politics/ The Sunday Standard/ September 14, 2014

Floods Have Made Bond Between J and K and Bharat Stronger, Article 370 Notwithstanding

Irony is the constant companion of contradiction. So far Jammu and Kashmir has enjoyed special status under Article 370. Last week, its people realised that a separate constitutional identity was no guarantee against nature’s fury. When the state structure—created under Article 370—collapsed like ninepins, it was the Union of India comprising all 29 states and seven Union territories which rose in unison to save its most splendorous geographical entity. The rest of the nation just forgot that a large number of locals from the Valley, including members of the ruling parties and separatists, were against the Indian state. For the past 65 years, they have been waging a war to retain J&K’s special status on paper only. They have been silent on the forced ethnic cleansing which drove Pundits out of the Valley. They have kept quiet when innocent Army personnel and helpless Kashmiris were killed in terrorist attacks. Over 90,000 people have lost their lives in the state during the past 25 years. Yet, India has been doling out grants to Kashmir, enabling it to compete with other states in terms of development. But the funds have only made a few people rich and rest of the state poorer. A special category of citizens who are the actual beneficiaries of the special status are the ones who are indirectly fuelling the fight against the abrogation of Article 370. But as the flood situation worsened, even hardcore supporters of separatists cursed the special status. All of them were looking to the Indian Army, Central government officials, PM Narendra Modi and his minister in the PMO, Jitendra Singh, to save them from apocalypse. It has taken a tragedy of immense proportions to turn J&K, an integral part of India, to become an inseparable member of Bharat Parivar. Despite Article 370, Srinagar was “taken away” from CM Omar Abdullah by the rapacious flow of water and his government was “totally inundated”. A team of officials led by Union Home Secretary Anil Goswami and Indian paramilitary forces ultimately prevented the devastation of a state and its people. The PM also dispatched IAS officer Ajay Kumar Pradyot to Kashmir to set up a system to track missing people and trace them, in the manner he did in Uttarakhand.

When 20,000 personnel drawn from the defence forces, equipped with modern communications systems and other equipment, were evacuating people, the local administration led by its young and acerbic CM was conspicuous by its absence. None of its two dozen ministers, 90 IAS officers and over 100 IPS officers were seen in action. Instead of asking his ministers to go out and save the people, Omar sent six of them to Delhi to demand money. He wasn’t even able to control stone-pelting by hired separatist goons to sabotage relief operations. Normally, in such a situation the CM, Chief Secretary and DGP take direct charge to minimise casualties and damage to property and livestock. Instead, Chief Secretary Mohammad Iqbal Khandey and DGP Rajendra Kumar were looking for safe havens from floodwaters, for themselves and friends. It is possible that most of them couldn’t step out of their homes due to excessive flooding. But none of them had any clue or plan in place to deal with natural disasters. Surprisingly, the website of the J&K Police defines the force as a “saga of sacrifice and courage”. But not one of its members was in sight to prove the slogan right.

The stranded inhabitants of the Valley chased away local politicians belonging to regional parties and even the Congress. They were genuinely upset over the total failure of the state machinery to rise to the occasion. J&K enjoys the dubious distinction of having one of the lowest GDP growth rates in spite of huge Central grants. What really takes the cake is that the state not only has a full-fledged Cabinet minister for flood control, Shyam Lal Sharma of the Congress, but also has a well-appointed office of J&K State Disaster Response Force in Srinagar. Set up in 2012, it has two battalions headed by an Inspector General of Police assisted by a Deputy Inspector General of Police. State leaders have been claiming that they had never expected such a large-scale disaster. However, in February this year, Omar himself had warned of such an eventuality. His government had hosted a two-day ‘State Level Conference of Disaster Preparedness and Mitigation’, which was addressed by him. At the meet, Omar spoke about the growing natural threat faced by the state and wanted the Centre to pay special attention. Experts from the National Disaster Management Authority also participated and gave their views on pompous-sounding subjects like ‘Overview of the Incident Response System and Disaster Management Architecture in India with Special Focus on vulnerability of Jammu & Kashmir’.

In reality, neither did the state government nor Kashmir’s permanent agitationists bother about the slow and steady degeneration of governance. All of them, including the Congress and National Conference, were more interested in keeping Article 370 on the statute book for the sake of preserving their vote banks. In the process, the safety of the state and its people became the casualty. For the past three decades, enormous time and energy has been wasted in debating the autonomy of the state, the role of Indian Army and human rights violations. In fact, the politics of the state revolved around keeping Kashmir deprived of the fruits of growth and prosperity, which the rest of India was witnessing. Any attempt by the Centre to connect Kashmir with other parts of country by road and rail were foiled by extremists. Even power projects were targeted and outside workers killed and kidnapped. For Kashmir’s short-sighted leaders, keeping the state in abject poverty and illiteracy was the instrument used to widen the gap between the state and the rest of India. Unfortunately, it has taken a loss of over 300 lives and property worth thousands of crores to drill the point home that India takes care of even its most truculent states. For all Indians, J&K remains their most cherished heaven on earth. The existence or absence of Article 370 is meaningless and J&K and Bharat were never separated at birth, and shall never be. By cruel irony, the floods have only made the bond stronger.

prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com;Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla

Dismantling Plan Panel Will Define........... Power & Politics / The Sunday Standard/ June 22, 2014

Dismantling Plan Panel Will Define Ideological Contours of Mission Modi

What is common between the Family Planning Department and Planning Commission? Both are white elephants. Both have let the nation down for the last six decades. Family Planning (now rechristened Family Welfare) has failed to stop deliveries. Planning Commission has failed to deliver. Because of these infamous institutions, India has suffered extensively. PM Narendra Modi seems to have decided to junk the commission in its current form. It had become a parallel power centre under former PM Manmohan Singh and his Sancho Panza, Montek Singh Ahluwalia, who dictated and decided the direction of India’s growth and development. Aided by foreign-educated advisers, Ahluwalia, a free-market promoter by conviction, used the commission to impose the US model of economics on the country. For the past 10 years, the commission has made the poor poorer and the rich richer and created wide disparities between various regions of the country. According to many former UPA ministers, as special invitee to all the Cabinet meetings and other Empowered Group of Ministers, Ahluwalia decided the fate of many projects and even the allocation of funds to the states. Heated arguments would often break out between him and Cabinet ministers on various issues and policies. Finally, he would have his way, supported by the PM.

Set up in 1950, the commission was expected to ensure “the operation of the economic system doesn’t result in the concentration of wealth and means of production to the common detriment”. No doubt, it was meant to promote public sector and ensure equitable distribution of national resources so that India’s poor would rise above the poverty level. The home page of the commission declares: “Planning Commission was set up by a Resolution of the Government of India in March 1950 in pursuance of declared objectives of the Government to promote a rapid rise in the standard of living of the people by efficient exploitation of the resources of the country, increasing production and offering opportunities to all for employment in the service of the community. The Planning Commission was charged with the responsibility of making assessment of all resources of the country, augmenting deficient resources, formulating plans for the most effective and balanced utilisation of resources and determining priorities.” The PM has always been its Chairman since Independence.

But over 120 members, including prominent economists who have served the commission since its inception, disregarded the mandate they were given. After Nehru’s death, it became the dumping ground for either unwanted civil servants or employment pastures for the old boy network and establishment stooges. For the first time, an adviser in the commission even asked for a royalty on a PPP document he authored for the commission. Even after 12 Five-Year Plans, over one-fourth of India lives below the poverty line at Rs 32 per day (as defined by Ahluwalia); over 60 per cent are homeless; 70 per cent of households are denied potable water; 65 per cent are without electricity and about 30 per cent don’t have access to primary education. The commission has been accused of packing its establishment with people who were paid to mine data, which would eventually find its way to mighty multinationals and semi-commercial institutions to help them plan their India business.

During the past decade, the commission has spent more time clearing projects like airports, highways and privatisation of natural resources, and less on poverty elimination and basic healthcare. With a core team of 20 that includes ministers and seven full-time members, the commission is assisted by over 60 advisers who have hardly ever served in small towns or villages. Most members have been associated with the corporate sector or academic institutions. During the last decade, the commission involved many pro-Congress NGOs to influence the policy framework in such a way that only their favourite projects got priority.

It’s not only the structure or composition of the commission that necessitates its abolition in the Modi Model of Governance, in which speed and not stupor gets priority. The commission has been a roadblock when it came to quick dispersal of funds to various ministries and states. Modi doesn’t want a multi-window system. The commission symbolises a regulated and controlled development process, driven by skewed priorities. The new PM is pushing for a monitored roadmap for development. For 60 years, the commission took various ideological turns, from Socialist, to a mixed economy and finally towards free market. Of late, it was known as the most powerful institution where crony capitalism flourished uninterrupted. Nehru established it keeping a defined mission in mind. But the commission has lost its political and economic relevance.

The commission was a source of nepotism in the government. Manmohan Singh appointed over 30 commissions, missions and panels to advise him on issues varying from potatoes to politics. He adopted the policy of show-me-the face and I-will-find-the-job. Missions on literacy, water, sanitation, skill development and knowledge were set up only to create a parallel system to the ministries. At one point of time, there were more heads of various commissions holding Cabinet rank than the actual number of Cabinet ministers in UPA. Curiously, a large number of them are drawn from various business and academic bodies. Some are just junior-level functionaries of business forums such as CII, FICCI and Assocham, whose primary job seems to be networking with officials and collecting important data for their own benefit.

Modi needs to order social audit of these institutions to discover whether they actually delivered on their mandate. According to finance ministry sources, over Rs 500 crore is spent every year just on salaries and establishment costs of such bodies. If Modi has to give a concrete shape to his mantra of Minimum Government, Maximum Governance, he has to strike at the culture of cronyism and purge the establishment of sycophants. Dismantling the commission will define the ideological contours of Mission Modi.

prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla

Irani's Reat Test Lies in .... Power & Politics / The Sunday Standard/June 01, 2014

Irani's Real Test Lies in Proving Best Educated Are Those With Knowledge, Not Degrees

If formal education, pedigree and degree are the panacea for the ills that plague Indian education, then India would be a global education powerhouse. Of the 29 Union ministers—including three former Prime Ministers—who presided over our mildewed, divisive education system since 1952, eight had doctoral degrees. Though the rest came from cultured families, neither had they studied abroad nor at any of India’s best-known, expensive educational edifices. Even after 67 years of Independence, a little less than half the population is not literate enough to possess writing skills. Does it mean that our elitist educationists conspired to let Indian educational establishments remain exclusive clubs for the rich and allowed basic education to suffer? India produces more graduates annually than more than half the world put together. Its education system breeds unemployment, criminality and caste and class conflicts. Hence, it is evident that even illustrious academic doyens couldn’t change the system. The furore over the qualifications of Smriti Zubin Irani, 38, who’s not only India’s youngest and least-educated HRD minister ever but also the first woman to hold the post, has much to do with the social disruption her appointment has caused among elitist academia and Congress’ imported ideologues, generating questions that confound them.

How can over 500 Vice-Chancellors of various universities, directors of IIMs and heads of other academic institutions hold a dialogue with a minister who hasn’t ever been to college? How will she provide affordable and quality education to over 220 million schoolgoing children and 11.7 million college students? Will she be able to tame the avaricious education mafia, which opens colleges and schools with the sangfroid of multinationals launching fastfood chains? Her antagonists fail to appreciate PM Narendra Modi’s Disruptionist Model of Governance. Like him, Irani, too, comes from a lower middle class family, which could ill afford a formal education for her. But she became a household name as a conventional Indian bahurani (daughter-in-law) on television, promoting Indian culture and values and not by doing item numbers. Her journey from a small screen diva to India’s HRD minister proves that practical education is also a route to success. It is because of her experience that she was chosen to draw a roadmap that would connect Indian education with the needs of the masses. Who else but Irani can address the agony of those ridiculed for lacking a college degree—the only recognised symbol of literacy?

Irani represents Modi’s mission of upending the Indian education system. Her agenda is clear. She has rightly asked to be judged by her work as a minister and not by her paper qualifications. She will have to deal with powerful CMs and ideology-driven NGOs. According to BJP insiders, those who were expecting better positions for themselves targeted her from within. Outsiders have chosen to put her on the defensive because they fear she would depoliticise the academic world. Since she doesn’t carry an ideological tag of either secularism or liberalism, she is expected to strike at the fault line of learning systems. Her objective is to completely Indianise the educational apparatus, which puts a premium on money-making and not all-round development. Barring Dr Murli Manohar Joshi, who ran the ministry for six years during NDA regime, all others were determined to take education either to the extreme left or left of centre. For example, Dr Nurul Hassan and Arjun Singh, who controlled the ministry for over 13 years, ensured that the primary and higher education syllabi were filled with either Nehruvian paeans or Leftist gobbledygook. All aspects of ancient Indian culture and nationalism were dismembered. All universities were filled with Leftist intellectuals. Those with contrarian views were hounded and deprived of jobs they deserved. Since Irani’s mandate is to restore ideological balance in all academic institutions, her opponents are leaving nothing to chance to un-nerve and cripple her before she drops those occupying top jobs, thanks to their connections to the previous Leftablishment. They dread her resolve to peel off the false, fake veneers of liberalism and pseudo-secularism from India’s temples of learning.

During the past 66 years, singing the National Anthem in schools has been a matter of faith or discretion. Various parties have placed more emphasis on expounding about their political icons in school rather than teaching children how to become responsible citizens. India’s institutions of instruction lack proper roofs and teachers. Every fifth child goes to a school that doesn’t have drinking water facilities. Even after six decades, Indian children haven’t been taught a language which can help them communicate with children in other parts of India. Over 33,000 degree colleges turn out graduates, most of whom end up joining the unskilled labour market or receive MGNREGS dole.

Irani’s hands are also tied since education is a state subject. But she has the power to set the benchmark for higher and school education because institutions like UGC and CBSE regulate the quality of learning in the country. Irani will not be judged by how many new schools or colleges she opens. She will be under pressure from market forces to open up the education sector for private investment without ensuring connectivity with employment generation. For the first time, we have a Prime Minister and an education minister who are not products of uber educational institutions. It is challenge for them to Modify the system so that their personal education-through-struggle model becomes an integral part of India’s school and college curriculum. After all, Irani has to prove that the best educated are those who successfully acquire excellent and effective forms of knowledge rather than those who acquire expensive degrees from glamorous institutions based in India or abroad.

prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla

Modi takes a leaf out of Congress book ..... Power & Politics/The Sunday Standard/November 03, 2013

Modi takes a leaf out of Congress book, plays politics of grief on enemy turf

Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Damodardas Modi is known for his innovative epiphanies. His cannily choreographed rallies are the envy of many a corporate and political leader. NaMo has become a mantra, a mission and a model of governance. Offence is always his best defence. But he is on a course correction spree. Modi is not a Demosthenes of ideology anymore. He has chosen to pay back his rivals like RaGa (Rahul Gandhi) and NiKu (Nitish Kumar) in their own coin. The Congress and its apple polishers dubbed Modi’s weekend visit to Bihar martyrdom tourism, charging him with playing politics of grief. Modi visited the homes of all the six victims of the serial blasts which rocked Patna’s Gandhi Maidan and other parts of the city during his visit to address the Hunkar Rally on October 27. NaMo, who had avoided visiting the victims of the 2002 riots in his own state for a long time, lost no time in burning up aviation fuel by dashing to Patna twice in one week to express condolences and score points over his rambunctious rivals. These well-calculated demarches have rattled his detractors and hit them where it hurts the most-their political constituency. A close look at his recent manoeuvres reveals that NaMo, a staunch RSS faithful, is experiencing his Dale Carnegie moment-he has lifted virtual chapters from the Congress’ book of ‘How to Make Friends and Influence Enemies’ in order to establish himself as the new messiah of terror victims. Fishing in troubled waters has been the most effective and consistent virtue of all political leaders. For our avaricious politicians, agony is opportunity, and misery the canon of success.

The last two weeks have witnessed scathing and scandalous scrimmages between NaMo and the supporters of both RaGa and NiKu. All have been extravagant with their arsenal in trying to lacerate and paralyse the opponent’s political moves. Both over half a dozen senior ministers of UPA and the Bihar Chief Minister challenged NaMo, accusing him of making factually incorrect statements against his adversaries and polarising voters in Bihar and other parts of the country. Now, he is charged with exploiting the grief of the terror victims of 26/10. Modi’s strategy is crystal clear. Like any guerrilla operating in a treacherous political jungle, he has chosen to shoot and scoot. Even though he was caught making gaffes about Nehru avoiding Sardar Patel’s funeral, NaMo is determined to impose both his politics and political narrative on his rivals. His Bihar Mission has a method in its madness. With Lalu Prasad in jail, Modi launched verbal drone attacks against the weak NiKu government on the twin issues of security and governance. He has decided to demolish NiKu’s credibility by accusing him of patronising terror at the risk of serious threats to the lives of senior leaders and communal harmony in Bihar. By visiting the families of the Patna blast victims, NaMo is drilling home the point that NiKu is least bothered about the personal tragedies of his people. So incensed was the Bihar chief minister with NaMo’s missiles that he retorted by unleashing a personal attack on his oppugner. Ridiculing NaMo’s frequent visits, NiKu termed his foe an outsider and claimed that the people of Bihar are “buying brooms during Deepawali to clean the garbage that has come to Bihar”.

It’s History Redux in the politically fertile land of Bihar. NaMo seems to have carefully imbibed that chapter of political history which changed Indian politics. It was in Bihar that Indira Gandhi launched her retaliatory charge against the Janata government in 1978. In August that year, militantly aggressive Kurmis mowed down 14 Dalits in the sleepy hamlet of Belchchi in Nalanda district. Only a year ago, Indira had lost power. But she lost no time in taking advantage of the bloody caste war that ensued. Karpoori Thakur, a socialist but a weak administrator, was the state’s chief minister. Indira landed in Nalanda and waded into the floodwaters on an elephant to visit each Dalit family, which had lost members in the caste pogrom. On her return to Patna, she called on the ailing Jayaprakash Narayan who was responsible for her crushing electoral ignominy. JP expressed his distress over the non-performing state government. He told Indira, “Indu, I wish  you a better future, brighter than your past.” Her Nalanda visit revived the Congress, and the party won its first by-election in the neighbouring state of Uttar Pradesh three months later—Mohsina Kidwai, the Congress candidate, won the Azamgarh Lok Sabha constituency, the first seat won by the party in north India after its 1977 rout. If a collapsed colossus like Indira could manage a triumphant return to power using raging caste violence, a NaMo with an equally charismatic personality and supported by a committed cadre could use the same political thesaurus.

In his campaign, Modi is only using the well-tested techniques adopted by Congress leaders in the recent past. His research team has compiled a long list of grief and poverty tours undertaken by top Congress leaders. Last year, Rahul Gandhi made a motorbike trip to bond with Bhattaparsol, where the Uttar Pradesh Police allegedly tortured farmers. The grief list also includes the nights spent by Rahul in Dalit colonies and the visits of Manmohan Singh and Sonia Gandhi to Chhattisgarh after top Congress leaders were massacred by Naxalites. Modiites are now reminding the Congress about the trips which Sonia and the Prime Minister made to Muzzafarnagar after 43 were killed in the worst-ever communal clashes in decades. If the Congress is accusing NaMo of marketing grief for electoral gains, the BJP has charged it with selling poverty to retain power. The tendency to encash on human tragedies for electoral gains is becoming an acceptable norm for taking a gullible voter for a ride. The Battle of 2014 is fought on the landscapes of the mistakes and miseries of the past and not on how to draw a new roadmap for the future.

In I vs I battle, it won't be ..... Power & Politics/The Sunday Standard/ October 27, 2013

In I vs I battle, it won't be easy for RaGa, NaMo to convince India of their worth

Indian politics is no more an Armageddon of ideologies. Electoral verdicts no longer define political ensigns of those who follow the bugle of the ballot. As ideological divides get blurred, elections are fought around personalities and not performance. The current clash of the Titans—Rahul Gandhi and Narendra Modi—defines the evaporation of a structured model or mantra for governance. The national discourse revolves around faults and faculties of RaGa and NaMo. Even the age difference between the two doesn’t deter critics and admirers from shifting the debate beyond the known and unknown skills of both leaders. Modi is 64 and Rahul 43.

If their demagoguery during the past two weeks is any indication, the election is being turned into I vs I. Their campaign tells a tale of new politics. Both talk more about themselves and less about what they represent. Rahul has convinced himself that invoking the Gandhi name, family culture and their sacrifices will sway the national Weltanschauung. When he talks about the assassinations of his grandmother and father, he is drilling the point that it is his family alone which can keep the country united and that he is not afraid to meet his Hamletian fate to save India. His speech writers are following the golden principle that an oration delivered with a correct mix of emotional charge and personal anecdotes is capable of carrying the target audience than words full of lofty ideas and dreams. Rahul’s clear strategy is to make himself, and not the Congress, his opponent’s target. He seems to have picked a leaf out of his grandmother and mother’s political strategy. Both Indira and Sonia have been primary targets of vicious personal campaigns. Indira was called a goongi gudia (dumb doll). Sonia’s Italian connection and her association with an Italian businessman has been the subject of barbs. But both staged comebacks. Indira recaptured the throne in 1980 with two-thirds majority, barely 30 months after she lost it in the spindrift of Emergency. In 2004, Sonia’s silent campaign led to the ouster of the government led by Atal Bihari

Vajpayee. Within two decades, she nearly doubled her party’s strength in Lok Sabha from 112 to 206. The Gandhi Parivar feels that the last two victories were appropriate rebuffs to those who indulged in personal attacks. Rahul is just experimenting with history. He is undeterred by the ridicule he invited for some of his recent politically incorrect utterances, including the one on Muzzarffarnagar riots.

Not to be left behind, NaMo has made his indigent origins his selling point. He doesn’t miss any chance to tell audiences that he used to sell tea and couldn’t attend a good school. He wants people to elect him the guardian of India’s treasury to prevent corruption. Without naming Rahul, Modi paints him as a leader born with the proverbial silver spoon. He calls Rahul “Yuvraj” and now “Shehzada”, who is thriving because he was born into the right family but failed to acquire any skills for dealing with ordinary Indians. Modi’s electoral aria is based on his own brand of politics and the Modi Mantra, which revolves around his style. Through gestures and choice of idioms, NaMo paints himself a victim of a campaign of hatred launched by a cabal of elitist social activists and NGOs. His promoters make the point that despite maintaining communal harmony and a spectacular performance in Gujarat, NaMo is being branded the Great Divider because he is a threat to votebank politics. Modi considers himself an outsider and a serious challenger to the class-oriented establishment. These sustained and dangerous personal attacks on NaMo have only made him one of the most popular political brands. He has converted Poll-2014 into a battle between pedigree vs performance; rich vs poor.

But there appears some method behind this personality-driven madness. RaGa’s political genealogy reminds one of Indira’s hyperbolic speechcraft on Garibi Hatao and whatever went in the name of a welfare state. Economics was hardly the central theme of her politics. Sonia adopted the Indira Doctrine, ignoring economic transformation brought by her late husband Rajiv. RaGa represents the aggressive and confrontationist politics of his grandmother and the socialist inclinations of his mother. For him, using state funds to provide freebies makes better politics than creating a favourable climate for markets and foreign investments. Rajiv ignored his mother and grandfather by dumping the mixed economy model by following P V Narasimha Rao who disowned Nehruvian Mantra. History has come full circle with RaGa pleading for a dominant role for the state. Unlike his father for whom good economics made better politics, RaGa is reinventing the grammar of good politics, which would lead to better economics.

Modi flies the banderole of good economics. The villain of 2002 is the new hero of 2013 because he is talking about delivery, development and dialogue. NaMo is the real follower of both Rajiv and Rao who created oligopoly. Rao opened up the economy for industrial houses, which were denied access to state patronage by Nehru and Indira. NaMo has promoted and created powerful corporate leaders in Gujarat and won over traditional Congress supporters even if it meant compromising with those who are opposed to his core ideology. NaMo talks technology, uses technology and swears by the markets. Like RaGa, the BJP’s PM candidate rarely dwells on international issues.

In what appears to be an apocalyptic confrontation between a declared PM contender and a scion of India’s perennial ruling family, their plights and delights have become bazaar babble. Political strategies and weaponry are being honed and polished. But for both leaders, it will not be an easy task to convince a self-righteous and argumentative India united by a 5,000-year-old cultural heritage of unity in diversity, of their true worth.

prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me  on Twitter @PrabhuChawla

Manmohan's air miles ... Power & Politics/ The Sunday Standard/ October 20, 2013

Manmohan’s air miles add up to little in way of India’s diplomatic success in nine years

• 

The success of diplomacy is not measured in terms of the air miles showing on the odometer of official peregrinations. Nor is it determined by hours spent gabbing during salubrious breakfasts, lunches or dinners. Such ceremonial visits are like climbing trees that have no fruits to pluck. Manmohan Singh is perhaps the most travelled Indian PM since Rajiv Gandhi. According to estimates, he has flown over a million miles covering 50 countries since he was handed the keys to 7 Race Course Road. In the last nine years, he has spent every 10th day in some foreign city. Since wooing superpowers is his only global mission, over half the visits have been to the US, China, Japan, UK and Russia, with US leading the charts with 11 visits. As Manmohan prepares for his 36th sojourn abroad—possibly the last of his second tenure as PM—diplomacy-watchers have started assessing the real impact of his 80 visits over nine years. On the face of it, relations with neighbours have worsened. Both China and US are showing no concern for our security and economic woes. Even India’s most trusted ally, Russia, is suspicious of our growing proximity to the American establishment. Europe, which used to look up to our economist PM for guidance, is ignoring us.

From being the most successful and sought-after PM, Manmohan is no longer one of the movers and shakers of international affairs. Perhaps our only achievement appears to be a change in adjective to define today’s India —from a developing economy, the country is now an emerging economy struggling to acquire a wannabe superpower status. Manmohan’s India is confined to the margins of the playfield of high-powered diplomacy, which defines and determines fortunes of the world. 

Even after a decade of extensive lobbying, Manmohan’s dream of India acquiring a permanent seat in the Security Council remains a mirage, despite doling out many economic concessions to those who count in New York. None of the beneficiaries of India’s economic liberalisation and munificence in terms on unrestricted access to Indian markets have gone beyond the written speeches they deliver at formal dinners, expressing sympathy for India’s claim for a permanent place at the UN high table. In spite of making over a dozen visits to the US, the PM has failed to force the American president to move an inch away from his empathy with Pakistan. Daily incursions and killing of jawans along the LoC does not bother any of the superpowers who continue to flirt with the democratically-elected but ISI controlled Pak premier, Nawaz Sharif. Ever since he assumed power, the number of border violations has risen enormously. He shows no regret. When Manmohan visits China and Russia this week, he will have to remind his hosts about the unfulfilled promises on border issues and civil nuclear cooperation. Russia is determined to rake up religious issues like the construction of a Russian orthodox church in Lutyen’s Delhi in exchange for letting a Krishna Temple function in Moscow. According to foreign policy experts, it is mandatory for every head of government to keep visiting friendly countries for the sake of visibility and impact. Since India has gargantuan stakes in the global economy, the PM and colleagues like the finance minister, commerce minister and external affairs minister keep making customary visits to numerous foreign capitals to revive dialogues and engage the hosts in building new relationships. But to succeed, objectives of economic and strategic diplomacy should be well defined. Going by our failed initiatives in the neighbourhood, it is clear that India hasn’t been able to hone the contours of its engagement with countries like Sri Lanka or even bantamweight Maldives, which was once considered India’s most trusted ally in the Indian Ocean. Last week, even a high-level visit to the island by the articulate Foreign Secretary Sujatha Singh failed to yield results. She could not bring Maldivian warring factions around so that elections could take place again. In Bangladesh, PM Sheikh Hasina is jittery because South Block couldn’t consolidate her position at home by addressing her issues with India. India may have become a trillion-dollar economy, but is still not in a position to influence political kinetics of a tiny island. So much for the vast carbon footprint of our frequent-flier PM.  

The perennial fight for turf between the IFS and IAS almost assumed confrontationist contours recently over the appointment of a chief of mission to ASEAN in Jakarta. The PM, during his visit to Indonesia, had announced that India would soon have a full-fledged mission headed by an ambassador to deal with growing economic relations between ASEAN countries. All other members have already posted diplomats in Jakarta. Before the PM made his decision public, a serious fight erupted between the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) and Department of Economic Affairs (DEA). The DEA felt that the post should go to an IAS officer as they are the ones who have acquired expertise in handling international trade and economic issues. But MEA wouldn’t let the post go. Finally, the PM used his veto power and directed MEA to appoint a senior diplomat. Now the fun has begun in South Block as many diplomats are chasing newly created sinecures which perhaps may carry more powers and perks.

It is not for the first time that IAS and IFS have been locked in turf war for important posts abroad. Ever since India decided to open its markets and introduce economic reforms, the IAS lobby has been staking claim on any assignment which is remotely connected with economic and financial issues. Actually the fight began with the appointment of India’s Ambassador to World Trade Organisation. The IFS wanted one of its members to be chosen, but IAS won the battle. But IFS fraternity continued with its fight. An attempt was made by MEA during the NDA regime to snatch the coveted post from the IAS. PM Vajpayee succumbed to the pressure and appointed an IFS officer as India’s ambassador to WTO. But IAS clan struck back through then commerce minister Murasoli Maran who resigned in protest. Vajpayee reversed his decision and the post was restored to IAS by sending K M Chandrasekhar who later became Union Cabinet Secretary.

prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla

By Redefining Role ..... Power & Politics/ The Sunday Standard/October 13, 2013

By redefining role, interventionist President proves he is no rubber stamp

Is it a constitutional catastrophe or a constitutional crisis? Or is part of the constitutional mechanism, which has accidentally been set in motion to prevent the collapse of democratic institutions? For the first time, the President is seen as the saviour of democratic traditions; sensitive to public emotions in the wake of Cyclone Phailin, he cut short his West Bengal visit during Pujo. On the other hand, the Prime Minister and the Cabinet which advises the President portray themselves as bulldozers of ethical governance. The spotlight has shifted from a non-performing PM to a pro-active President.

For the past few weeks, Pranab Mukherjee, India’s 13th President, has been active in restoring a semblance of balance in the age of confrontationist politics. As the countdown for the crucial General Elections begins, he is formulating his role and reactions to various surprises, which elections may throw up. If his recent actions are any indication, Mukherjee is emerging as the President who doesn’t confine his role to ceremonial talks, but also speaks forcefully. He nudged the UPA leadership to reconsider the ordinance on criminals in politics. He changed his pre-scheduled Bihar programme to avoid being caught in a conflict between the JD(U) and BJP over Narendra Modi’s visit to the state at the same time. Mukherjee’s recent weeklong sojourn to Denmark and Turkey left his signature mark on diplomacy, which led to the signing of many agreements pending for over a decade. Before launching the premier visit by an Indian President to Belgium, he told all ministries to prepare a proper agenda so that his visit doesn’t turn out to be just another junket. Just before he left, the Rashtrapati sprang a surprise on diplomats by almost blaming Pakistan directly for cross-border terrorism by remarking, “terrorists don’t come from heaven”. Of late, Congress managers have been sifting through Mukherjee’s speeches and comments to decipher his frame of mind. They suspect that he is acquiring the role of both a titular Head of State and an invisible influence on the institution of PM. The buzz in the corridors of power is that President is now doing what he would have done as the Prime Minister of a coalition government.

If Mukherjee continues with his assertive constitutional agenda, he would perhaps earn a place in history as the best prime minister the Congress party failed to choose.

It is too early to define his definitive identity, but Mukherjee seems to possess massive energy to shake and shape the future contours of Indian politics and governance. If Dr APJ Kalam earned the sobriquet of “People’s President”, Mukherjee is carving out his own niche of an interpositionist President who wouldn’t mind asserting his constitutional rights to correct any impropriety in governance and misuse of Constitution. L K Advani, the National Democratic Alliance chairman, embarrassed the President when he gave full credit to Mukherjee and not Rahul Gandhi for the premature demise of the ordinance. Mukherjee seems to be finding ways and means to provide face-saving devices to ruling establishment at the Centre and in the states to bail out of ugly situations. Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar was determined to use the President’s visit as a ploy to prevent crowds from reaching the venue of Modi’s rally on October 27, but Mukherjee understood the trap and decided to return to Rashtrapati Bhavan the same day. Such politically correct moves are indicative of Mukherjee’s attempt to redefine the role of the Head of State, since his purpose is not merely to avoid being stereotyped as a rubber stamp or an activist President.

Mukherjee asserts himself with authority and dignity. Since he is the first President who has held all the important portfolios of defence, finance, commerce and external affairs previously, he knows better than most about how decisions and policies are formalised in a Cabinet system. For example, when the PM sent him the file seeking his approval for the ordinance, Mukherjee didn’t return it after signing on the dotted line, as most of his predecessors would have done. He summoned three important ministers—Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kamal Nath, Law Minister Kapil Sibal and Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde. All of them have been his colleagues in the party for decades. They weren’t expecting his probing questions. Never before has a President asked ministers to produce minutes or records of Cabinet discussions or political confabulations. Mukherjee asked them to produce the proceedings of both the Cabinet meeting and the all-party meet where the decision to promulgate the ordinance was taken. He discomfited them by asking for the reason behind their hurry. They did not return with answers. Instead, the Cabinet approached him to withdraw its request for his approval.

It is quite evident that Mukherjee is arming himself with infallible arguments to face any situation. He is marshalling his facts to disarm those who challenge his formulations. As an avid reader of history, the Rashtrapati has already retrieved the files from the archives concerning the formation of various past coalition governments. Three previous Presidents—R Venkataraman, Shankar Dayal Sharma and K R Narayanan—had taken different positions on how to choose a party to form the government. Mukherjee has found inconsistencies in each. According to Rashtrapati Bhavan watchers, the President has been interacting with numerous legal luminaries, including former chief justices, social activists and even sane political leaders to seek their views on many complex issues concerning security, political stability and economic crises. The limitations of the geographical boundaries of Raisina Hill haven’t deterred its latest incumbent from reaching out to those whose voice is gagged and who are denied access to India’s high and mighty. If Mukherjee continues with his assertive constitutional agenda, he would perhaps earn a place in history as the best prime minister the Congress party failed to choose or spot after Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi.

Prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla

It takes much more than just talk .... Power & Politics /The SundayStandard/ September 29, 2013

It takes much more than just talk to become country's maximum leader

A volcanic eruption incinerates all that is dead or alive that stands in its way. When Congress Vice-President Rahul Gandhi’s inner voice emerged finally on Friday, it not only shook the UPA government’s foundations but polarised the Congress party itself. His 150-second intervention at the press briefing on the controversial ordinance devastated the national discourse on crime in politics. The subtext of his vehemence was a Churchillian riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma—did he undermine the office of the Prime Minister or convert an adversity into an opportunity?

The Gandhis have now realised that CEO Singh and his executives have outlived their utility and can’t ensure profits anymore.

It was a war of words and not ideologies of two eminent individuals. While PM Manmohan Singh manages the compulsions and contradictions of his coalition government to remain in power, the Congress vice-president appears to be fighting for survival of his party, the ownership of which the Gandhis acquired through democratic means. Rahul’s accidental outburst marks the arrival of the Rahul Congress and the beginning of the end of the conventional one. He has sent a clear signal to party leaders and the PM that he is no more just a vice-president. He has taken charge and would like to eject those who can’t deliver according to his expectations. It’s not a mere coincidence that the Congress GenNext, comprising scions of many top leaders, is leading the Congress Spring. The fruits of political family trees are ready for harvest as the party’s core team is flooded with sons and daughters of former ministers, current and former CMs and state Congress leaders. Even progenies of retired civil servants are active as members of Rahul’s backroom organisational team. Does it mean that his latest offensive against the government is an attempt to directly dictate and decide future policy formulations and replace an outdated leadership with younger leaders who have more at stake in future of the Congress? Or is it prompted by frustration stemming from his own failure to effectively lead the party in the past nine years? Rahul has spoken out to prove that he not only has views but also enjoys the authority to admonish his government when required.

Gandhi Jr’s opponents have ridiculed his rare parliamentary appearances and occasional disruptive interventions in public debates. Rahul has been under attack for his silence over mismanagement of the government and party. He has been accused of performing vanishing acts when his party was looking towards him for guidance. His acerbic, contemptuous and piercing remarks against the dubious ordinance have more to do with redeeming the sagging image and plummeting fortunes of the party, which he inherited from his mother Sonia Gandhi. Rarely has a leader of a ruling party termed an action of his or her government as “nonsense” and advised followers to tear up a decisive document and throw it away. Rarely has a leader publicly questioned the wisdom of his PM by instructing him to retract his ‘nonsensical’ decision taken at the behest of his Cabinet comprising 30 ministers who belong to his own party and allies. Rarely have young ministers protested a decision of their own Cabinet. But the Congress is not a political party. And Rahul is not just any leader. He is an owner who expects rich dividends. Singh was chosen as PM or CEO of the government not because of merit. He was picked by the Gandhis to lead a political company that they own. As it happens in many family-owned corporates, young inheritors rarely get along with executives chosen and trusted by forbearers since they have been brought up in a different milieu and play by their own rules. Initially they tolerate the status quo but are always on the lookout for an opportunity to dismantle the old edifice and replace with their own. The Gandhis are no exception. It’s in their DNA to encourage dissent against the establishment and discard the antediluvians. Indira Gandhi defenestrated the Syndicate and reinvented the Congress in her own image. Her son Sanjay Gandhi introduced Youth Dominance. He was a young man in a hurry and would have changed both the Congress culture and ideology had he not been snatched away by a divine nemesis. Rajiv Gandhi, who became an accidental PM after his mother’s tragic assassination, was already in the process of superimposing suave urban technocrats on the Congress structure and inducting them in the political process. Though a natural charmer, Rajiv was also abrasive in his public outbursts. He sacked and replaced senior civil servants and CMs. A reluctant politician, Rajiv also created the dismal dynastic landmark of being the first Gandhi who failed to win a second electoral mandate.

His wife Sonia turned out to be the exception. No doubt, she was guided by Machiavellian elements to get rid of P V Narasimha Rao, and then Sita Ram Kesari as Congress Presidents in a questionable manner. But she retained old family loyalists and brought the Congress back to power within six years of taking over as party president. She realised that a person like Manmohan Singh with his impeccable track record minus political ambition would be the best choice to run the country. She made him the PM but retained the power to choose his ministers and exercised her right to provide mandatory policy instructions on many issues. He turned out to be an asset who delivered handsome dividends. The Gandhis have now realised that CEO Singh and his executives have outlived their utility and can’t ensure profits anymore. As a single shareholder, Rahul wants a CEO who understands not stock exchanges in New York and Mumbai but political markets in Muzzafarnagar and Madurai. He feels that the current government leadership can’t retain the current market of the Congress, which will shrink if corrective measures aren’t taken. He wants the endorsement of the masses, not markets.

After Nehru and Indira, it was under Sonia’s leadership that the party won for a second time with a record number of 206 seats—more than what Rajiv garnered in 1989. Now, almost 24 years later, his son, who is seen as a part-time politician, has realised that he would be held accountable for the lapses of the government, which is misperceived as functioning through remote control by the Gandhis. With his mother taking lesser and lesser interest in party affairs, it is for Rahul to revive the Congress and take it to victory in 2014. So far, he has been an outsider crisscrossing the country in search of Bharat, accompanied by close aides. Hardly have the PM and other senior party leaders consulted him on national issues. So, the young inheritor finds himself disconnected with their style of working. By projecting Rahul as India’s future prime minister, party veterans have already made him the general who has to win the war of 2014. Rahul understands the trap. From being a frequent traveller within and outside India, he is now forced to become a full-time politician and face the heat and dust of dirty Indian politics. Rahul has taken the plunge by sending a message. He has taken a risk, which could mar or make his career. He has minimised the PM, but it takes much more than just talk to become the country’s maximum leader.

prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla

In UPA Il's twilight, PMO takes wings..Power & Politics/The Sunday Standard /September 22, 2013

In UPA II's twilight, PMO takes wings for smooth takeoff of Manmohan's dream project

South Block’s current fatal obsession is not about engaging friends and foes of the world’s superpowers. For the past few weeks, the goalposts of Indian diplomacy have changed. All energies of the Indian establishment’s many paid and unpaid megaphones are being diverted to get the PM’s dream project airborne. Since the Nuclear Civil Agreement is Manmohan Singh’s single genuine achievement in his two terms in office, he wants to ensure that it takes off in with fanfare and fireworks. He couldn’t have chosen a better venue than Narendra Modi-ruled Gujarat. Suddenly, the diplomatic discourse that had moved towards peace talks with Pakistan PM Nawaz Sharif has become just a footnote in the discussion papers in the dossiers prepared for the PM’s US visit next week. Since it is customary for all visiting Heads of State to carry gifts for their counterparts, the Indian PM has been advised to take along a copy of the pact between the Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd (NPCIL) and Westinghouse, the US multinational which supplies nuclear reactors to many.

Since the PM is an accidental politician who trusts more in his academics than political polemics, he doesn’t mind ignoring the electoral compulsions and fallout of his actions. It is not a coincidence that NPCIL was suddenly activated to seek legal opinion from the country’s top law officer on how to bypass nuances and legal bindings of the nuclear law passed by Parliament. The Department of Atomic Energy (DAE) reports directly to the PM and all nuclear-related establishments like NPCIL and Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) fall under the ambit of PMO. According to reports and senior diplomats who facilitated the agreement in 2008, India promised various US globocorps over 10,000 MWs of power, worth over $20 billion in contracts. Five years later, not a single deal has been finalised because of the protective Clause 17 in the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act. It was understood that the Indian operator would insert a clause in the agreement which provides heavy compensation in case of any accident. But not only the US but also its corporates have mounted pressure on India to dilute this clause. For the past few months, top leaders like Vice-President Joe Biden and Secretary of State John Kerry have been protesting to Manmohan on the delay in the dilution of the liability laws. Even the heavyhitters in the Senate have been relentlessly attacking the UPA for its inaction.

Only last month, Mark Warner and John Cornyn wrote a strongly worded letter to President Obama: “Eight years later, the agreement has not been implemented and we have yet to see India provide a workable nuclear liability agreement that allows companies to move forward.” Curiously, US corporates are not mounting pressure on their own government to encourage the setting up of nuclear power plants at home. Even America’s steadfast ally Japan is dismantling its nuclear plants following Fukushima. Hence it was puzzling that Ashwani Kumar, the PM’s temporary special envoy to Japan, should boast about the assurance he claims to have received from the Japanese on extending help to India in our nuclear energy programme. Ironically, on the same day, Japanese PM Shinzo Abe had announced that the toxic remains of the Fukushima plant would be destroyed.  While the world can ignore the might of the greenback, it is India which dances to the tune of the American corporates.  

It is, therefore, not surprising that the government is determined to exploit the loopholes in the manipulated and mutilated mandate it got in Parliament to pass the nuclear agreement. Obama and the US nuclear lobby hustled the agreement through at home. But invisible and lucrative assurances given to the US during the 2008 negotiations through interlocutors are now beginning to surface. The mandarins of both White House and South Block with the backing of powerful business forums in both countries are now working overtime to finalise the fineprint of a draft which will allow Westinghouse entry in India’s nuclear energy business. But the roadblock is within. According to unconfirmed sources, the AEC which dealt with superpowers and the US to push the deal through is angry because DEA had bypassed it. Also, supporters of the well-tested Indo-Russian strategic relationship are of the view that the Americans can’t be trusted as they are guided by profit motives and would subvert any legal provision which ensures the security of Indian citizens. The fight between the pro-Russian and pro-American lobbies in India is acquiring dangerous proportions, leading to the leakage of several classified  documents. Even senior diplomats are surprised over the speed with which the PMO is promoting the nuke deal. Since most have been chosen for their ideological commitment to the US model and nuclear energy, they are likely to win in the end. On the other hand, those who are pleading for slow action feel that the next government may dilute the agreement. But these critics have been silenced by the PMO with the excuse that the BJP’s opposition to the unfolding revelations is pathetically feeble. Since the beneficiary of the dilution of the liability clause would be Gujarat—the palatine of BJP’s PM candidate—the PMO expects a rough but safe ride to Washington. Ironically, though Modi never misses an opportunity to attack Manmohan as a ‘maun pradhanmantri’, on nuclear projects for his state, Modi’s maunvrat has become Manmohan’s mantra for his mission. The PM may return to India wearing a broad smile and showing the V-sign even if it means an embarrassment to Congress and BJP leadership.

PS: Dr Rakesh Sood’s appointment as PM’s Special Envoy on Disarmament has stirred a hornet’s nest in the nuclear lobby within. As the PMO readies to take the N-deal forward, those who have failed to secure any post-retirement sinecures have started a whisper campaign. Their novel epiphany is that Sood would work against the deal. Some are even trying to restrain his responsibilities and minimise his say in any future nuclear engagement with the US. But the PM is in no mood to patronise the saboteurs.

prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla

Modi must become an institution ... Power & Politics/ The Sunday Standard/September 15, 2013

Modi must become an institution like Vajpayee to become a symbol of India

The old BJP is dead! Long live the new BJP! The operatic anointment of 61-year-old Narendra Damodardas Modi as the BJP’s new helmsman doesn’t reflect just a generational shift. He epitomises a new breed of politicians whose words speak louder than their work. The Modi marvel is an antidote to Vajpayeeism—the pause generating a faster pace of political acceptability. It also marks the end of L K Advani’s agenda based on evolving and tweaking ideology according to the need of the times. Modi is now the BJP’s modern mascot and mantra. He is seen as the most visible, decisive and credible alternative to the Gandhis. He is also perceived as a leader who would sacrifice systems and formalities for the Modi Model of Governance. For him, the democratic process is just another exercise to acquire legitimacy and authority to achieve his targets. The new BJP under Modi is sure to run politics on the lines of a business model, in which time-bound achievements and not excuses will decide the fate of the stakeholders. His track record in office is the envy of his adversaries. He knows how to sell an idea to both the masses and the classes. The villain of 2002 is now the hero of 2013.

No such parallel exists anywhere in the democratic world of a minimised leader becoming the maximum leader by nudging out all his contemporaries within and outside the party. Modi’s propulsion to the national stage is the sign of a new India where degree, pedigree or an elitist social tag can no longer dictate a leader’s destiny. Modi is the first state satrap who has been chosen to lead the national party, superseding the claims of upper caste, well-spoken and elitist national leaders who have no state to call their own.

Though the choice of Modi was finally dictated by the emotional fortissimo of political necessity, both the BJP and RSS had found it difficult to spot a leader who could energise a demoralised cadre and defend Hindutva’s core ideology. They saw in Modi a commander who could communicate with the people directly and connect with the aspirations of the youth. Vajpayee could, with oratory and an affable persona. Modi has done it with his performance and aggressive personality. He is neither a team leader nor a team player. Modi is the team and the leader all rolled into one because he firmly believes that democracy ends when action begins. Ever since he won the Gujarat Assembly elections for the third time, he was projected as the only saviour of the faction-ridden BJP in which there are more candidates for prime ministership than the number of national parties in the country. By choosing Modi, the Sangh Parivar has closed the door on others—at least for now.

Both the BJP and Modi have taken a big risk. The party has handed over its leadership to a person who trusts only his spoken words and his tested wisdom. No one can find fault with his decisiveness, clarity of thought, personal integrity and missionary zeal. It is because of these unique selling points that the entire party ignored Advani’s well-reasoned opposition to Modi’s elevation. Advani was never against projecting Modi as PM, but was dissentient on the timing, as he felt that the 2014 election should be fought on the issues of corruption and non-performance of the UPA government. Advani and others were also of the view that once Modi became the face of the party, the Congress and other parties would sweep their poor governance under the carpet and turn  the election into a Mahabharata between secular and communal forces.

But the patriarch’s objections were ruthlessly overruled because of the massive pressure mounted by impatient cadres and middle-level leaders on the party high command. They are convinced that Modi would run the party like the chief executive of a big corporation whose targets and means are well defined and result-oriented. They think that he is the only one who can expand the market share of the BJP by promoting it as a unique product, bearing the distinctive Modi brand name. The Gujarat chief minister has already mastered the art of communication using cutting-edge technology. He always thinks out-of-the-box and comes out with schemes and ideas that has never been seen before in politics. For example, projecting holograms using 3D technology to ensure that his presence is felt in all districts in Gujarat is a device that has never been used by any political leader to connect with voters. Such persuasive instruments prompted foreign diplomats, who abhorred him for over a decade, to seek a minute of his indulgence now. Modi’s novel delivery mechanisms also forced leaders of India Inc who once shunned him as a political bezonian to seek photo-ops with him.

Achieving status is altogether a different ball game than living up to it. Now that Modi has crossed internal hurdles within the party, he has to soothe all genuine fears about his style and substance. Running a state government with a brute majority is not the same as managing a coalition at the Centre in which every leader is a kingmaker. Modi’s first challenge is to ensure that none of his senior leaders are ignored in the party and he doesn’t run the BJP with the help of corporate paratroopers. After all, party workers and middle-level leaders are not shareholders looking for monetary dividends. They want an ideology to dictate governance. Modi is labelled as a divisive leader. He has to get rid of this lethal label because the BJP is unlikely to win a majority on its own in 2014. Since Modi has taken a big risk, he has to learn to respect the ones with genuine differences of opinion. With the birth of new BJP, a new Modi, too, has to be born. The idea of a ‘Modi from Gujarat’ cannot become a symbol of India unless he becomes an institution like Vajpayee.

prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla

New dispensation will inherit... /Power & Politics /The Sunday Standard, September 08, 2013

New dispensation will inherit injured economy and diminished diplomatic legacy

Diplomacy is not just the art of sweeping difficult situations under the carpet. It is also an instrument to score invisible victories. Indian diplomats have acquired new expertise in converting inconvenient realities into inglorious heritage. Last week, when Defence Minister A K Antony was cornered for his ministry’s failure to contain the Chinese Army’s growing incursions along the Line of Actual Control (LAC), he blamed the 1962 war for India’s current border woes. Antony hardly speaks his own mind. But he was told by diplomats that sending strong signals of protest to the Chinese would provide fuel to warmongers and pseudo-nationalists. For the past few years, Indian diplomats have become internationalists who care more about how their words impact international community than their domestic consequences. Never before has the Indian Foreign Service been so concerned about kowtowing to aggressors like Pakistan and China as they are during the UPA regime. Absolving our hostile neighbours is their new mission. For example, for the past few months China’s People’s Liberation Army has been arrogantly establishing physical control over large areas falling on the Indian side of the LAC. But India’s Ambassador to Beijing Subrahmanyam Jaishankar is more concerned about his future responsibilities as India’s next ambassador to the US. It is during his three-year tenure that China successfully captured not only India’s markets by dumping cheap goods but also expanded her geographical girth. Yet he has been rewarded with a better assignment for failing to raise the alarm and advising the government to take corrective measures against our neighbour’s hostile intentions. Jaishankar represents the new breed of Indian diplomats who are successful in pursuing their own agenda even at the cost of damaging the political credibility of the government they serve. It is not surprising that not even once have the Opposition and foreign policy experts blamed our diplomats for ignoring the national mood. After some of them realised that in the New World Order, strategic and security considerations play an important role in their future prospects, they are succumbing to the pressure mounted by strategic thinkers. Since adopting an aggressive posture against Pakistan and China is deemed as going against global strategic considerations, South Block mandarins are willing to sacrifice good diplomacy to protect strategic dialogue, whether in India or abroad.

AK Antony's speech on China in Parliament reflects that Indian diplomats have become internationalists who care more about how their words impact the international community than their domestic consequences.

In the past decade, the offices of the National Security Advisors of countries, from the US to India, define the contours of diplomatic moves. Their objective is to ensure an unreal yet tenuous global peace even if the results are lethal economic and security blowbacks in the long run. It is not just a coincidence that both China and Pakistan have taken on India at a time when America is involved in containing or toppling regimes in West Asia using its military might. The US establishment is determined to ignore domestic opinion against military intervention in Syria. It’s no wonder that the US advises India to exercise restraint but ignores China and Pakistan’s military adventurism. Taking a cue from Big Brother, Indian opinion-makers and think tank “intellectuals” have maintained a diplomatic silence against US aggression in West Asia. New York was the centre for launching the US economic doctrine for the rest of the world. Now Washington has become the launching capital for defining the template for global security.

Last fortnight when I wrote about the collapse of Indian diplomacy, a failed and accidental diplomat launched a diatribe against me. Short of calling me names, he questioned my sources and logic, forgetting that I knew more about his kind of diplomacy and other shenanigans going on in South Block. There were a couple of factual errors in my column. The thrust of the article, however, was that cronyism is the key determinant for choosing diplomats to key positions. Some officers like Ashok Kantha and P S Raghavan mentioned in my column are outstanding officers with impeccable integrity, but their appointments were marred by the ad hoc selection of other colleagues for better sinecures. Now the government is moving fast to fill vacant posts and correcting past errors. For example, I questioned the absence of an expert to deal with the Nuclear Suppliers Group. Last week the Prime Minister chose Dr Rakesh Sood as his envoy to deal with disarmament. Sood is one of the rare diplomats who knows nuclear diplomacy and science like the back of his hand. Similarly, the foreign ministry finalised the appointment of the current Ambassador to Malaysia, Vijay Keshav Gokhale, a 1981-batch officer as India’s next envoy to Germany. His compulsory foreign language is Chinese, yet he has been picked to replace Sujatha Singh who took over as foreign secretary recently. T S Tirumurti, an Arabic-speaking officer of 1985 batch, replaces Gokhale. An excellent diplomat, Tirumurti has been “rewarded” for his rebellious nature; in 2011, he was moved from the key position of joint secretary (BSM). The Prime Minister, however, is yet to find a candidate for the UK because he has to make a choice between a person who can protect both the Indian market and security or one whose only concern would be to become a part of the diplomacy dictated by Big Brother.

As the elections draw near, the PMO is moving very cautiously, since the next government would scrutinise in detail the credentials and credibility of those diplomats who have been or would be chosen for important assignments. With half a dozen of them retiring within the next few months, Indian diplomacy is also likely to suffer much damage to its authority and effectiveness along with the political establishment. The new dispensation will not only inherit a mauled economy but also a diminished diplomatic legacy.

prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com; Follow  on Twitter @PrabhuChawla

Don't lose sleep over mauling.. /Power & Politics/ The Sunday Standard, September 01, 2013

Don't lose sleep over mauling of money-minded markets, instead join the masses

Dear Prime Minister,

As a former student of yours, I must confess that your speech in the Rajya Sabha was shockingly un-Manmohanlike. The content, diction and body language gave your adversaries enough ammunition to dub it a speech delivered by a backbencher looking for attention. You are still respected globally and in a large part of India as a leader who knows his economics right but his politics utterly wrong. Survival in office for nine years is no mean feat. But you are not associated with that kind of politics of survival in which convenience, and not conviction, plays an important role. Sonia Gandhi chose you as PM over senior Congress leaders who were once your bosses in government only because she wanted a reputed economist with impeccable personal integrity to improve upon the record set by the NDA government in reviving the economy. You weren’t expected to lead the political discourse. That was to be defined and dictated by her. It was a clear division of power between the head of the party and the head of the government.

It worked during UPA I as you decided to run the government on your own terms and achieve your mission of becoming the darling of Global Capital. You staked your government to get the Indo-US Civil Nuclear Treaty through in Parliament not because you were feared but because you stood firm in your conviction. International leaders always gave you a place on the high table of economic diplomacy.

During the past few years, Newton’s law of “what goes up must come down’’ validated itself in your career. If we trust the opinion polls conducted by various media organisations and marketing agencies, your popularity has plummeted faster than the value of the rupee in the past few months. Silence is always a potent weapon for a credible Prime Minister. Your predecessor, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, hardly spoke. And when he did, after a pause he demolished his detractors. It’s no wonder that even after being out of power for 10 years, his popularity is intact. On Friday, you spoke too much after having kept silent on a wounded economy and fractured politics. More than half the members of your own party were missing from the Treasury benches. The Congress’s habitual rabble-rousers who have mastered the art of filibusting were conspicuous by their absence. Barring an unusually aggressive Finance Minister P Chidambaram, over two-thirds of your mammoth Cabinet chose to stay away to nurse better platforms than the Rajya Sabha. Some of your colleagues felt that your aggressive offence against the Opposition turned out to be your weakest defence. Otherwise, a widely admired economist like you wouldn’t blow your own trumpet when you claimed that “despite what some members may say, I do command a respect in the Council of G-20 (a forum of top 20 powerful nations)... Have you ever heard of any democracy where the Opposition doesn’t allow its Prime Minister to introduce his ministers?” Your agonised expression reflected the crises of identity and authority which were bothering you.

Parliament expected a doctor-like PM to tell its members about what was ailing the economy and what needs to be done individually and collectively. Instead, you were finding fault with the rotten food rather than the rot in the vegetables. You failed to fix any accountability or suggest remedial measures. You wanted the country to believe that the use of chemical weapons in Syria has inflicted wounds on the Indian psyche. While you did admit to some mistakes, the thrust of your extempore narrative was that it is the entire country that has let the people down. Don’t forget that your team of advisers trained and educated abroad gave every possible concession and encouragement to investors, both in India and overseas. You opened up every sector so that they could get the environment they need to boost economic growth. Your government even made the import of pricey foreign liquor free for all five-star hotels so that their rendezvous in India would bring in more dollars. All these supporters were your most powerful megaphones as long as the going was good for them. But they failed to create wealth in India. They ignored unskilled labour. They went on pushing you to give them more incentives and withdraw subsidies from products, which the middle and lower classes use. Moolah for the rich and misery for the poor became the hallmark of your government’s economic philosophy. SEZs went underground even before their foundations were dug. FDI in retail is still a mirage. The corporates got what they wanted and termed your team a dream. Now they are the same people who are running your government down. They want to avoid your government’s company. They are blaming your policies for their non-performance and asset stripping. They have spent their money on luxuries, and now want more to run their businesses. They neither want to invest nor make their units more productive. Parliament wanted you to assert your authority on these avaricious corporate buccaneers. Your party expected you ensure that over $40 billion stuck as Non-productive Assets with corporate leaders are recovered and put to use. The Opposition wanted you to unfold a road map, which would restore your credibility as an economist, revive the India Growth story and make you the mascot of good news for the Congress. Your advisers must study and analyse how those who once saw Narendra Modi as the villain of disharmony and divisive politics now perceive him as their hero and the saviour of a sinking economy. For them, once you were the God of Boom. Now they feel your government is the harbinger of doom.

Moral of the story: Those who use you for their success also dump you when you lose your utility. You will lose nothing and make monumental gains if you don’t lose sleep over the mauling of money-minded markets and instead join the masses.

(prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com. Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla)