With Good politics and Better ...... Power & Politics/The Sunday Standard/May 17, 2015

With Good Politics and Better Economics, Amma Set to Acquire Recognition Beyond Her State

The wattage of power doesn’t always electrify the gilded chair of prominence in an office or an institution. Leaders derive their authority from their ability to lead and deliver. She may have been out of office for a while, but her power or acceptability has not been lost, either among the cadres of her party, AIADMK, or a large number of people from within and outside her state, Tamil Nadu. The coming week is likely to see 67-year-old J Jayalalithaa back on the throne at Fort St. George, Chennai. Her fatigued foes may question her acquittal by the high court, but the reality is that Amma has retained her halo of invincibility in the state. Her followers and admirers trust her for her decisive demeanour, charismatic appeal and ability to provide a responsive government. The congratulatory call Narendra Modi made to her soon after the high court verdict was not just a casual courtesy. Rarely does a Prime Minister call up a state leader after he or she wins a legal battle involving motivated graft charges. But Modi knows Jayalalithaa’s importance in both state and national politics. Controlling 48 MPs in both Houses of Parliament, Jaya can make or mar the survival chances of numerous legislative drives. By all indications, she is going to stage a grand comeback in the Assembly elections due in 2016. Pollsters are betting on her victory because the ground-level feedback reflects a tsunamic endorsement of her policies. Most people feel that she has delivered on almost all the 170-odd promises made in the 2011 state elections.

Amma’s indispensability lies not just in the numbers she controls, but also in her model of governance, which is akin to Modi’s in Gujarat earlier and now applied nationwide. Jayalalithaa is not attached to any institutionalised ideology or dogma. Her administrative direction and the nature of policies clearly indicate that she has genuinely pursued the philosophy of a welfare state in which the poor and the marginalised get priority. After 33 years in active politics, she is very much aware of the social, economic and political complexities of her state. Jayalalithaa began her administrative innings as the in-charge of the Mid-day Meal Scheme started by K Kamaraj in the 1960s and expanded exponentially by former Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M G Ramachandran in 1982. She made a huge success of the scheme, which was the first of its kind to be launched in India. Since then, she has always been in favour of allocating more money to schemes and projects, which benefit the poorest of the poor. For example, during the past four years, she has taken special interest in launching schemes that provide essential commodities at highly subsidised prices, so that the underclass does not suffer from inflationary pressures. Endeavours like Amma Canteen provide breakfast of idlis, sambhar and rice to over 10 lakh persons at Rs 1-5. This was followed by yet another initiative, the Amma Mineral Water Project, which provides clean potable water. As chief minister, Jayalalithaa also ensured that the middle and lower middle class get cement below the prevailing market rate. A limited number of cement bags costing Rs 190 each was made available to those constructing state-approved homes. She also ensured that besides being assured of water and food, the people of Tamil Nadu could also buy medicines at reasonable prices. She opened Amma Pharmacies in the state, which sell drugs at highly subsidised prices.

The astute administrator didn’t confine herself to distributing dole. During the past four years, Jaya filled a large number of vacancies in the state government, providing employment to jobless degree holders. For example, over 70,000 teachers were recruited to shorten the instruction gap in schools. There is hardly any sector which hasn’t received attention and financial support from her government. Myriad infrastructure projects, including roads, power plants, drainage, sewage lines, school buildings and the linking of rivers to improve irrigation facilities got liberal funds from the state.

Jaya’s short absence from Fort St. George had put the brakes on the implementation of her development agenda. Though Amma is a loner by nature, her bureaucracy has been stupendously successful in creating a favourable investment climate for big business. Jaya’s Vision 2023 expects an investment of $250 billion flowing into Tamil Nadu. The state accounts for 25 per cent of the national automobile output with major international corporations such as Nissan, Hyundai and BMW setting up manufacturing units there. Tamil Nadu also contributes about 18 per cent of India’s electronic goods production with the top MNCs like DELL, Samsung, Foxconn operating in the state. It is because of such a favourable investment environment that FDI had increased from $1.2 billion during 2010-11 to over $2.8 billion during the last year in the state.

Jayalalithaa has enough political clout as a popular powerhouse. Now she is determined to acquire economic superstar status as well. Already Tamil Nadu contributes 8.25 per cent of the GDP, second only to Maharashtra. It has been the fastest growing state in terms of Gross State Domestic Product. It is the state government’s fabulous fiscal management, however, which has wiped out its revenue deficit in a mere span of the past four years. When Jayalalithaa took over as CM, the deficit was Rs 3,000 crore. Last year it had a surplus of over Rs 600 crore. Surprisingly, despite splurging on social welfare schemes, Tamil Nadu is perhaps one of the few states, which have shown a healthy improvement in revenue collection. Its own tax yield as percentage of GSDP grew from a little over 8 per cent in 2010 to 11 per cent during 2013-14. In absolute terms, the state’s total revenue collection witnessed a 100 per cent increase during AIADMK’s rule, clearly indicating that significant leakages had been blocked.

Encouraged by her huge success on the political and development front, Amma has emerged as a leader who knows how to provide a pragmatic mix of good politics with better economics. Like Modi, Jayalalithaa is blessed with great oratory skills and the unquestioned loyalty of her supporters. In Modi’s new mantra of Cooperative Federalism, a powerful leader like her can play the role of both a spoiler and a supercharger. With her political rivals at home paralysed by her popularity, Jayalalithaa is now a regional leader who is all set to acquire recognition and influence beyond the geographical boundaries of her state. Modi has correctly studied the direction of the wind and wasted no time in connecting with her. He dialled the right number—One.

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

Those Challenging India's ...... Power & Politics/ The Sunday Standard/May 10, 2015

Those Challenging India's Resolve to Crack Down on Foreign NGOs Can Do So At Their Own Peril

Diplomacy is defence by design and offence through opprobrium. Envoys are expected to defend their countries even at the cost of giving offence by distorting facts and disseminating fiction. But it is undiplomatic to threaten their host country or embarrass a friendly nation. But the US ambassador to India, Richard R Verma, ignored the basic principles of civilised protocol. Last week, when the NDA government acted to ensure accountability in India’s money-minting NGO sector, Verma leapt to their aid and exculpation. Instead of using diplomatic channels to convey his government’s concerns to the home ministry, Verma chose a public platform to put the Indian government on the mat. Upset with its action against Greenpeace and Ford Foundation, Verma reflected a rare anger against Indian establishment. Speaking on the Indo-US relations, he warned, “I read with some concern the recent press reports on challenges faced by NGOs operating in India... Because a vibrant civil society is so important to both of our democratic traditions, I do worry about the potentially chilling effects of these regulatory steps focused on NGOs.” He didn’t elaborate on what he meant by the temperature metaphor, but it is evident that the US is wary of the home ministry’s order on severe scrutiny of the functioning of a large number of foreign-funded charitable organisations. It isn’t for the first time that the government decided to investigate the real motives behind the mushrooming of NGOs in India. Ever since the BJP government took over in May 2014, it has served notice on over 9,000 NGOs which failed to comply with Indian laws. Verma didn’t object then, because none of them were funded by American corporate entities or charities. His indignation surfaced only when the US outfits came under scrutiny. Last week, the government decided to probe the bank accounts of the Gates Foundation over discrepancies between the money received and spent. The foundation has refuted the allegations. Verma should have kept in mind that the scrutiny by Indian agencies is far more lenient than that of American agencies on their own charity organisations. Some of their 15-point charter of guidelines are:

• Charities should maintain and make publicly available a current list of their five highest paid or most influential employees (the key employees) and the salaries and direct or indirect benefits they receive.

• Charities are independent entities and are not part of the US government. Like all US persons, charitable organisations must comply with the laws of the US, which include, but are not limited to, all OFAC-administered sanctions programs.

• Charitable organisations are encouraged to adopt practices in addition to those required by law that provide additional assurances that all assets are used exclusively for charitable or other legitimate purposes.

• Charitable organisations should operate in accordance with governing instruments, e.g., charter, articles of incorporation, bylaws, etc. The governing instruments should: a) delineate the charity’s basic goal(s) and purpose(s); b) define the structure of the charity, including the composition of its governing body, how such body is selected and replaced, and the authority and responsibilities of the body; c) set forth requirements concerning financial reporting, accountability, and practices for solicitation and distribution of funds; d) state that the charity shall comply with all applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations.

• Charities should maintain and make publicly available a current list of members of the governing board, their salaries and affiliation with any subsidiary or affiliate of the charitable organisation.

• While fully respecting individual privacy rights, charities should maintain records of additional identifying information about the members of the governing board, such as available home, email and URL addresses, social security number, citizenship, etc.

• Charities should produce requested records maintained in accordance with these guidelines to the appropriate regulatory/supervisory and law enforcement authorities in a timely fashion.

• The charity should clearly state its goals for and purposes of soliciting funds so that anyone examining the charity’s disbursement of funds can determine whether the charity is adhering to those goals.

Verma probably feels he has legitimate justifications and fears on the intention of the probe. But India couldn’t just stand by when most NGOs were using foreign money for political activities and diverting funds to finance agitations against a number of infrastructure projects. A few years ago, a US foundation used an Indian NGO to test a vaccine on young girls in the name of child care. The government noticed the toxic fallout and banned the experiment. The increasing inflow of greenbacks from America to elitist Indian NGOs has raised suspicion among Indian agencies. Domestic NGOs received about Rs 3,800 crore during 2012-13 from the US as against around Rs 3,000 crore during 2009-10.

The Modi government has genuine reasons to suspect that many NGOs are being used to infiltrate the Indian establishment through universities, youth bodies and NGOs working in the environment field and foreign relations. Since a large number of these bodies are controlled by highly connected civil servants, corporate houses and politicians, foreign-funded organisations have also been dictating their agenda before releasing the funds. Even the choice of office-bearers and speakers at seminars, coffee table dialogues and protests organised by them are decided by foreign agencies. In the past three decades, the NGO industry has grown faster than many developing economies. India has one NGO per 400 people, and their total budget exceeds that of a big state like UP.

What has irked the Indian leadership are the sermons delivered by various foreign leaders, including US President Barack Obama. Indian intelligence agencies have enough evidence to substantiate the charge that many NGOs are behind fomenting communal tensions in India. Yet Obama made uncharitable remarks about the recent attacks on churches and other places of worship. Understandably, the Obama confraternity gets its feedback from the NGOs financed by the America’s rich. Verma’s indignation was also influenced by the views of the company he keeps in India. Since he represents the world’s most powerful democracy, he ignored the reality that India is the globe’s largest democracy. The lure of dollars may mould the minds of few greedy individuals looking for foreign jaunts and jobs, but it can’t shake the faith and commitment of the nation-shapers who matter. India is fighting to earn its legitimate supremacy in a world that is rapidly changing geopolitically, is resource-driven and terror-infested. Anyone who challenges its resolve will do so at his or her own peril.

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

It's Time for Modi ....... Power & Politics/The Sunday Standard/May 03, 2015

It's Time for Modi to Ensure that Minimum Government is More Visible in Maximum Action

Politics is more about perception than performance. As Narendra Modi completes his first year in office this month, the scrutiny of his performance by both critics and admirers has breached the thermal limit. Since he conquered the harried heart of the scam-stung voter, expectations were frighteningly vertiginous. In May 2014, he set the tone and tenor of public discourse. He converted ‘development’ from being just a slogan into a manifold mission. As an oratorical oracle, Modi was able to convince all that he was the monolithic messiah who would rid India of its miseries. The Modi Model of politics and governance got unprecedented national approval. During the past 11 months, he gave India many new ideas and suggested innovations like Swachh Bharat, Make in India and Digital India.

In May 2015, however, the tide of national narrative seems to be turning. Despite Modi’s stellar achievements in foreign policy, ensuring economic stability, movement towards devolution of financial powers to the states, emphasis on infrastructure development and taming corruption, the public focus has shifted to the agrarian crisis, Ghar Wapsi and insensitive remarks made by leaders on women issues. The sudden shift from performance to perception about the nature, composition and intent of the BJP-led government is worrisome. It symbolises the chinks in the marketing strategy and inability of NDA spinmeisters to sustain the enormous goodwill towards Modi’s résumé as Gujarat’s CM.

In the fog of their fallacies, the fact that inflation has fallen significantly, the trade deficit is under control and many new initiatives have been taken in the infrastructure sector is being ignored. India’s swift intervention in restoring normalcy in earthquake-traumatised Nepal has been lauded worldwide. For the first time in the country, electricity generation in 2014-15 crossed one trillion units, showing a growth rate of 8.4 per cent over the previous year—the highest in the last two decades. The government successfully auctioned spectrum and coal mines without any questions being raised over the mode and manner of selling natural resources.

Yet, it is not Modi’s performance that is grabbing the headlines. Newspapers, opinion-makers and even diplomats are now discussing whether a rejuvenated Rahul Gandhi would be able to put the brakes on the Modi juggernaut. Undoubtedly, the BJP has become the world’s largest political outfit with the enrolment drive under party president Amit Shah taking the membership to 10 crore. Yet its sartorially obsessed spokespersons are losing out to their counterparts in other parties over ignorance on debating issues. They have made negativism their prime weapon. Even during parliamentary debates, Union ministers and senior leaders go on the defensive when facing consistent cannonade from a united opposition.

Their charges give the impression that the BJP is keen to propitiate only those who control industry and diplomacy. For a change, even Rahul found some support in the social media and seized prime time space when he dubbed the NDA as a suited and booted government. On land acquisition, Rahul’s barbs are capturing more eyeballs than the entire Team Modi. While he and other Opposition leaders wax eloquent on farmers and women’s woes, most BJP leaders are defending the Land Bill, which hardly helps the ruling party fight the battle of perception. Even though over a dozen ministers are being pummelled metaphorically on India’s streets and villages on the bill, it hasn’t prevented the ruling clique to attempt any course correction and bring the debate back to the core issue of real performance. With most of the upper echelons of government being inaccessible, the NDA government is most conspicuous by its invisibility.

Perhaps Team Modi has lost the plot. For it, ratcheting up the reform raga instead of governance appears to be the only benchmark to measure the popularity and success of the government. Its victories in getting important legislations like the Insurance Bill and FDI in defence are positive signs. Industry would be happy to see the GST Bill passed in Parliament. But all these actions have little to do with helping poor and middle class India, which wants employment, jobs, affordable housing and efficient public transport. Nothing seems to have moved on these fronts. The dismal fourth quarter results of most Indian companies indicate that the economy is ailing. For the first time in a decade, supply has stagnated with no sign of demand picking up in any sector. Exports are showing a massive fall, which may overturn the gains India had enjoyed due to the massive decline in crude prices. 

Yet, Union ministers and CMs are spending more time with business leaders from India and abroad, to invite more investment. Tycoons enjoy and broadcast these tête-à-têtes but are yet to commit to any handsome investments. They only want tax concessions and unhindered access to the Indian market. The Modi government has done much more than the UPA in terms of policy corrections to make India one of the most investor-friendly markets in the world. Yet its magnanimity hasn’t yielded many dividends so far.

In the process, its popularity in middle and rural India has significantly suffered. Poll results in the recent municipal elections in West Bengal have punctured the hype created by a few rootless BJP leaders about the party’s acceptability in the eastern state. Modi’s detractors are now awaiting the outcome of the Assembly polls in Bihar followed by West Bengal and Uttar Pradesh. He would be under pressure to play to the gallery by pushing administrative decisions, which would be lauded by the rich.

But Modi has to remember his vow: not to be held hostage to the dissolute Delhi culture, which promotes elitist exclusivity. On his first anniversary as PM, Modi has to insulate himself from enemies more from within than without. He must note that it is he, and not any of his trusted ministers, who is under attack for acts of omissions by the government. His loyalists may be at their verbal best in defending him but some are the worst performers in their own ministries. Modi’s sustainability as a leader with wisdom and vision lies in going back to the basics and the masses. He will do well to engage in reverse economic engineering by de-prioritising the service sector. He has to revive small and medium scale manufacturing and rescue agriculture from imminent death. Delhi, Mumbai and New York can wait. Bharat wouldn’t like Modi to fail because it still sees in him a decisive leader. The time has come for him to ensure that minimum government is more visible in maximum action and delivery.

prabhuchawla@newindianexpress.com Follow me on Twitter @PrabhuChawla

Foster Farming ...... Power & Politics/ The Sunday Standard/ April 26, 2015

Foster Farming with Those Familiar with Ground Reality, Not Foreign-Educated Planners

If there is glory in fame, there is also cruelty in being a celebrity. Gajendra Singh Kalyanwat was just another depressed, nameless and faceless farmer from Rajasthan, until he hanged himself in front of thousands of AAP volunteers and TV cameras in New Delhi last week. Unsurprisingly, every politician irrespective of the colour of his flag, is agonising over the farmer’s tragic death. Gajendra has become a household name worldwide. His family wants him declared a Shaheed Kisan (martyr farmer). His semi-pucca house has become a pilgrimage site for the political class and TV channels. Barring corporate fat cats and Bollywood badshahs, almost every loquacious luminary has waxed eloquent on the abominable plight of India’s farmers. But the dismal discourse is more about the relief package for Gajendra’s family rather than diagnosing the real reason behind the rising number of farmer suicides. According to official figures, one farmer takes his life every half hour in India. Every fourth suicide in the country is that of a farmer. Fifty years ago, then Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri coined the slogan ‘Jai Jawan, Jai Kisan’ because he understood the contribution of agriculture to the Indian economy. Five decades later, the BJP struck an emotional chord during the 2014 elections by attacking the UPA with the war cry ‘Mar Jawan, Mar Kisan’ (die jawan, die farmer) depicting the dire state of the Indian agricultural ethos under the UPA.

The welfare of our farming community, however, has been degraded into mere election slogans, only to become the subject of a blame game debate when Gajendra and ilk are driven to death. Unfortunately, for the past four decades, India’s economic planning has only touched upon the agriculture sector, all the while working for the growth of the elite service sector. Less and less money is being invested in the rural sector from which over 60 per cent of India’s population earns its livelihood. Fifty years ago, agriculture contributed around 45 per cent to the GDP. It has dived drastically to less than 14 per cent. The policy of politically linking land and finance to the farmer is yet to be incubated. Let alone easy loans, kisans do not even receive on time basic necessities like fertilisers during the sowing season. On the contrary, marketwallahs are pressuring the government to withdraw foodgrain subsidy to avoid paying massive capital gains tax. They have been pushing direct transfer of subsidy on PDS but avoid arguing for providing farmers with fertilisers and power.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi realised the futility of the Planning Commission and similar institutions, which have been responsible for creating regional and sectoral disparities. He took a bold step of replacing the commission with a National Institution for Transforming India (Niti Aayog). Since Modi’s emphasis is on Digital India and Make in India, he has chosen well-known, foreign-educated economists to advise him on the country’s growth roadmap ahead. All of them have outstanding academic track records. But India needs to foster its farming community and the government should also choose those who are familiar with the heat and dust of Indian villages. The ruling class has conveniently forgotten that India still lives in the villages and aspires to enjoy the benefits of its growth story. But economic policies have been framed in such a way that service sectors can employ cheap rural labour to boost their bottom lines. It may be farfetched to connect the decline of Indian agriculture with the composition of the Planning Commission and the pace of economic reforms, but statistics and the track record of servile seneschals who ruled the commission at the Centre and in the states confirm that it was used to tailor policies and public investment in favour of the service sector at the cost of agriculture.

The process of economic reforms started in 1991 when Manmohan Singh was finance minister. At that time, the share of agriculture in GDP was about 35 per cent and that of services less than 30 per cent. But when he stepped down as the Prime Minister in 2014, the agriculture sector was staring at total extinction with its share plummeting to just 14 per cent. India is the first developing country in the world where the services sector contributes over 65 per cent to the GDP. It is evident that the Central government was promoting its growth and chose as advisors only those who were committed to markets over agriculture.

From 1991 onwards, almost all Planning Commission members held foreign degrees or had worked for multinationals or the World Bank and its affiliates. From 2004 on, Montek Singh Ahluwalia and his four colleagues were only pushing investment in services and high-tech businesses, which yielded quick returns. Those who had no connections with the farming sector infiltrated even the state planning boards. Over the decades, theoretical Oxbridge pundits lacking any concept of the idea of Bharat have captured Indian institutional mechanisms. They saw foreign financial institutions and stock markets as the real symbols of prosperity in a poor country like India. None of those who are responsible for taking crucial decisions on agriculture have spent even a single night in an impoverished village, plagued by conscience or mosquitoes. Liberal resources were allocated for the setting up of elitist institutions like IIMs and IITs, while only frugal funds have gone into creating institutions that specialise in agricultural research and advising farmers on how to improve productivity and change cropping patterns. There has been little investment in creating irrigation facilities, leaving farmers at the mercy of the vagaries of the weather. On the other hand, liberal fiscal concessions were given to those who invested in the stock market. While big industrialists and techno-titans have been feted and awarded, hardly any official scheme exists to give financial incentives to those who introduce innovations in the farming sector.

India’s growth story will never be sustainable unless agriculture becomes the fulcrum of economic planning. The glorification of the elitist supply side model has to be buried if Bharat has to be revived. India needs a policy, which stops the trend of tillers turning into realtors because farming is becoming unprofitable. India’s neglect of the rural sector is visible on the shelves of upscale markets. One can find big stores in all the metros, selling imported fruits, food products and fancy vegetables while Indian produce has been delegated to the carts of vegetable vendors on the street. Modi will have to put in place a dream team, which supports him in his commitment to reviving the slogan Jai Jawan, Jai Kisan.

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

With His Networking Style, Modi ...... Power & Politics/ The Sunday Standard/ April 19, 2015

With His Networking Style, Modi May Well be the Hero who Defied Conventional Diplomacy

                                         Modi (left) with his Canadian counterpart Stephen Harper

A day is a long time in politics, but for Prime Minister Narendra Modi, a year is a short time. He has become a record-holder as the first Indian PM to spend the maximum number of days abroad travelling to 16 countries in just 11 months. When Air India One bearing him and his delegation landed at the Indira Gandhi International Airport on Saturday morning after his eight-day visit to France, Germany and Canada, Modi earned the distinction of spending every eighth day abroad ever since he took over in May last year. In contrast, NDA’s previous Prime Minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, had made just three visits covering four countries over seven days in his first year in office. His successor Manmohan Singh was more active in international affairs. He spent 28 days outside India during his six visits to seven countries. Modi’s itinerary has been carefully planned by keeping his priorities in mind. His directive is clear. Connect with neighbours and do business with affluent nations. Barring Russia, Modi has visited most countries which influence international business. He has been to the US in the West, Japan in the East and Australia Down Under. When he wasn’t on board Air India One, Modi was unrolling red carpets for visiting heads of states from China, Great Britain and the Middle East. It is also a matter of record that most heads of states or foreign dignitaries made India their destination of choice in the first year of Modi’s tenure. Over 100 of them have met him so far, with the same purpose, to win his heart. The villain of 2002 has become the global hero of 2014.

The frequency of his visits is not the only difference between Modi and his illustrious predecessors. Both had travelled to other nations mostly for multilateral talks and not to settle bilateral issues as Modi is doing by engaging global leaders. The PM is known for his marketing mantras. He has captured a major chunk of the Indian political market using innovative sales pitches and mesmerising packaging savoir faire. He is using similar innovations to market India to the world’s powerful nations. Economic diplomacy is at the heart of his singular statecraft. Perhaps, he is actually putting into practice the famous saying that the best way to a man’s heart is through his stomach. Modi has understood the seductiveness of the gargantuan size of the Indian market which every nation with desperately avaricious multinationals are salivating over. He chooses his audience and the content of his speeches by playing to the economic hunger of host countries. He extols bullet trains, electronic El Dorados and infrastructure in Japan. He speaks about mining in Australia, makes deals on civil nuclear equipment with France, talks to the Americans about financial reforms and to India’s neighbours about the advantages of peaceful coexistence.

Modi’s strong emphasis on economic diplomacy is obvious going by the content of his speeches and the nature of his interactions during his foreign visits. His invariable meetings with the corporate aristocracy of the countries he goes to have become an essential feature of his travel diaries. If he is in Japan, he meets tycoons from Sony, Suzuki and top Nippon bankers. In the US, his visit is not complete unless he has addressed top American corporates. Previously, trade and commerce have rarely been part of Indian foreign policy. Former Prime Ministers were scared of meeting business barons during their official overseas visits. Now prominent Indian corporate leaders zoom off as advance parties to prepare the ground for Modi’s business meetings. Multinationals are finding it smooth going to do business with a country whose Prime Minister is not bound by administrative protocol and antiquated business baggage. In the sequence of priorities, trade now comes first on India’s new economic diplomatic agenda. Modi has made civil nuclear energy and indigenisation of the defence equipment manufacturing sector as the premier pillars of his diplomatic je ne sais quoi. Since he has converted Make in India into his messianic mission, he seems to be working according to a plan. No foreign company would like to make in India what it makes at home without irresistible inducements. For example, the deal for the supply of 126 Rafale aircraft had remained enmeshed in the bureaucratic web for over a decade. Allegations and counter-allegations of arms lobby adventurism were flying around like pilotless aircraft. Modi simply canned the prodigious pile of files and became the first Indian Prime Minister to announce a deal during a foreign visit without holding formal consultations with domestic stake holders. He invented a new mechanism of signing a government-to-government defence deals to prevent middlemen walking away with huge commissions. With a stroke of his pen, Modi obliged both the French government and French industry, showing his resolve to facilitate the entry of their companies into a sensitive sector. Only Modi could possess the flair to give an on-the-spot order for 36 Rafale fighter aircraft  worth over $4 billion. He wanted France’s Dassault Aviation to invest in India as fast as possible. Earlier, he had changed policy to allow FDI in the defence industry to reduce spending on arms imports in the long run. Already many Indian companies like Bharat Forge Ltd, Anil Ambani’s Reliance Group, Tata Group, Mukesh Ambani’s Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL), L&T, Godrej Group, Mahindra Group, Astra Microwave Products Ltd, Dynamatic Technologies Ltd, Centum Electronics Ltd, Precision Electronics Ltd and Technologies Ltd have set up subsidiaries to produce defence equipment and have sent their top representatives to France, Germany and Canada to expedite follow up measures. In Canada, with his visit generating business worth 1.6 billion Canadian dollars, Modi made it a point to approach corporate captains of the insurance industry, as his NDA government had raised FDI limit in the particular sector.

But it is not the number of companies which flock to his meetings that matter. What matters for Modi is the kinetic gush of dollars which flood India to propel his favourite projects. Through his networking style and bold posturing, Modi wants to go down in history as the hero who defied the golden rule of conventional global diplomacy, which says that in the world of international engagement, some things are better left unsaid. But Modi by his tone, tenor and tendency says it all.

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

Media Must get Rid of ..... Power & Politics/ The Sunday Standard / April 12, 2015

Media Must Get Rid of the Enemy Within to Fight the Hypocrisy of Political Class

Condemnation is savagery through subjectivity. Opinion is outlook of objectivity. Emotion is the alchemy that binds both. In the larger biological metaphor of history, politics and the press are twins with incompatible DNA. They are meant to be adversaries during times of conflict between public interest and political profiteering. The recent outburst of General V K Singh, the Minister of State for External Affairs, against sections of the media reflects the growing conflict between the might of the pen and the powerful politician. Enraged over negative reporting about his earlier conduct as former Chief of Army Staff, Singh continues to carry his hostility in his holster. He has coined an innovative term of abuse, ‘presstitutes’, against journalists who have been hounding him. He has perhaps forgotten that he is no longer an Army commander who can command an independent media. He pulled off a stellar performance by leading from the front in getting stranded Indians evacuated from Yemen, but he couldn’t wait for his work to speak for him.

Singh’s excessive ire has raised questions about the credibility of the cursor. More and more politicians are veering towards his opinion. The India media has been at its most fearless when it pulls on its gloves to take on the establishment. In the past decade, however, ‘media’ has become a dirty word and journalism an adjective to describe all that is rotten in the industry. With over 250 news channels, 50,000 newspapers and magazines, and websites at their disposal, almost all literate persons have become either reporters or commentators. Most of them not only contradict each other but also provide innovative versions of the same story. The perception among readers and viewers is that the media—particularly the electronic—is like a stage on which actors are performing their roles with sound and fury, signifying nothing but according to a script. Anchors have replaced reporting with rhetoric. TV panelists are asked in advance about their opinions instead of letting them evolve their views during the debate. If any of the participants don’t agree with the pre-drawn conclusions, they are dropped as panelists or aren’t allowed to express views in print or on TV. The illusion of independence was perpetuated during the last elections by TV channels, which gave hours of live coverage of political rallies without even informing viewers that the source of the feed was the parties. What is source for the goose is not sauce for the gander.

Such selective self-imposed censorship has perhaps provided a handle to Singh and his type to hit out at the media, which needs to do some introspection. In the wake of fierce competition for ‘breaking news’, regurgitating old news or stealing from other papers and labelling them as exclusives, some of us are forced to dole out novel nuggets which destroy the credibility of the truth. Let us accept that the recent sting ops have exposed the vulnerability of many journalists who try to extract information from sources by engaging them in indiscreet conversations. The recent Documentgate and earlier the Radia tapes damaged the credibility of many journalists. The leakage, however, was selective and unrelated, passed out by a few politicians and civil servants who meant to protect some journos and defame others. Then the media did not question the tapping of phones, like it is doing now. Even I have received puerile payback for speaking to Neera Radia, though I don’t mind reiterating that I would speak in the same language with her, or someone like her, if she was to call me again. There are manufactured ‘truths’ and the real truth that will prevail. Curiously, I seem to be the only journalist to put the entire conversation with Radia on my website for social scrutiny. None of the other 36, including famous and infamous names, dared do that. Incidentally, both the previous organisation where I worked and the current one carried stories on my banter with Radia. From breaking news, I became news.

The media is under much severe scrutiny now than ever. Since the public, which doesn’t own any press platform, is mounting pressure on the mainline media to speak the truth and nothing else, we have to be more transparent in our practices. We must inform the public that journalism today is a lucrative career. The average monthly salary of a mid-level journalist is over Rs 1 lakh. Some editors draw seven-figure salaries every month. But it isn’t enough to rant against morality while sipping a Macallan 18 or a glass of exclusive wine and sharing cozy club gossip about politicians they are beholden to. All of us in the media, especially the titans, must declare our assets. We should also make public the shares we bought of companies at what price and sold to whom at what price. It should be mandatory for every columnist and editor to disclose his connections with ministers and corporates, government agencies, NGOs and foreign think tanks. Even media owners should disclose subsidised land or any other benefits they got from a particular state or the Centre, and whether they have sold it accruing huge commercial gains.

Unless the media becomes more transparent than the government and big business, it will remain the target of politicians and others who subvert the system. There are clear signs of a class and corporate coalition taking shape in the media industry. Ominous signals aimed at maiming independent opinion are emanating from various parts of the country. Contrarians are hounded by the establishment. Surprisingly, such a trend was noticed years ago by social scientist Noam Chomsky. At a lecture, he said, “Those who occupy managerial positions in the media, or gain status within them as commentators, belong to the same privileged elites, and might be expected to share perceptions, aspirations and attitudes of their associates.” Journalists entering the system are unlikely to make their way unless they conform to these ideological pressures. Chomsky concluded by saying “those who fail to conform will tend to be weeded out by familiar mechanisms”.

The media needs to restore the balance between news and views, and subjectivity and objectivity. Unless it gets rid of the enemy within, it will continue to be targeted by the political class, which thrives on demolishing those who challenge its hypocrisy.

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