The “India Shining” campaign kicked off by the NDA in 2004 with a bang ended in a whimper. Similarly, now in 2009, the “Jai Ho” campaign of the grand old party of the country that began with some confidence seems to be all set to meet the same fate of the “India Shining” campaign as the third phase of the elections is over. There were no substantial issues that the party could raise during the run up to the polls for a healthy discussion or debate except to react to its opponents charges or to hurl the same epithets or abuses that were thrown at it. There was neither imagination nor newness even in returning the abuses. For example, when the BJP called Dr Manmohan Singh as “night watchman” to keep the seat warm for the dynastic heir Rahul Singh, NDA’s PM candidate LK Advani was dubbed as “night watchman” for keeping the chair warm for Narendra Modi. Even school boys would come out with better and imaginative phrases, I mean abuses.
On every issue that was raised by the Opposition during the campaign the Congress either fumbled or was found to be utterly defenceless. Take the issue of Otavio Quattarocchi. Well, the ghost has resurfaced at the wrong time for the party. But how did the party react? The party wants the people of this country to believe that there was no scandal involving the Bofors gun deal. “Where is the evidence”? “No shred of evidence to link up the top echelons of the party” “All the courts have thrown out the case”. “CBI acts on its own” “Don’t flog a dead horse”. These are the one-liners coming from the party spokespersons right from the Law Minister. Probably the party thinks that the first time voters may not even know the nuances of Bofors scam nor the slogan in those days “Galli Galli mein Shor hai, Rajiv Gandhi Chor hai” and that the man who got the record-breaking mandate in 1984 was made to bite the dust by the people of this country precisely because of the scam.
The party which used the CBI to scuttle the probe at every stage and helped the most intimate friend of 10 Janpath -“Q” - (a code in the Bofors diary) to flee the country now says that when there was no case against him, why should his name be in the Interpol’s Red Corner notice list. If he is such an innocent and noble soul and there is no evidence against him, why should he hide himself in Malaysia and try to get out of Argentina when arrested? He could have as well faced the law courts here and got himself acquitted of all the charges. It could have greatly relieved his friends at 10 Janpath of acute embarrassment. That much he should have done for his friends. On the contrary, four days before the country could get documents from Sweden linking him to the gun deal, he fled the country. Could he account for the 7.2 million dollars in his account that was frozen for long and was defrozen because of the Congress government’s chicanery? At every stage the Congress government used the CBI to dilute the case against “Q” and now asks the NDA government what did it do during its tenure. True, as some analysts point out that the “Q” episode, timing of which is undoubtedly suspicious, may not decisively work against the Congress poll prospects. But it has greatly dented its credibility and political morality with the result that every cartoonist replaces the first letter of Congress with “Q” to read “Qongress”. What a shame!
Even on the issue of black money that is stashed away in tax havens, the Congress was found talking in too many voices. First, it said that the Leader of the Opposition was relying on some bogus data available on the internet. Then a question was asked what did the NDA government do during its tenure to bring back the money to India. When Prime Minister was asked to raise the issue at G-20, we were told that G-20 was not the forum to discuss such issues when in fact it was in the G-20 agenda. When all these alibis did not convince the people, it was revealed that the government did get names from the German government. Of course, we are yet to know those names. If this is true, where was the need to come out with those excuses in the first place. What the people of this country were not told was that global pressure was increasing on the tax havens to cough up the illegal money because of the unprecedented cash crunch. Every developed country is facing liquidity crunch and they want to arm twist the tax havens and it is in this connection Opposition wanted India too to join the campaign so that the black money of 75 lakh crores, atleast a part of it, can be brought back. Again, the Congress failed in “MQ” test (Morality quotient)
The most sordid drama that was played during the poll campaign with absolute insensitivity and inhuman intent was that of UPA partner – DMK. What was uppermost in the mind of its chief Karunanidhi was the vote box rather than the tinderbox that innocent Sri Lankan Tamils were exposed to trapped as they are in the war between LTTE and Sri Lankan Army. The Congress played its own role in this drama. Karunanidhi is a very good script writer no doubt, but his skills did not stand by him while writing the script for his five-hour fast-unto-death drama. He knew, thanks to his Qongress friends in Delhi, that Sri Lanka might announce that it would not use heavy guns in the war zone to avoid collateral damage and Karunanidhi sprang a surprise by spreading his bed in the Marina beach one fine morning after his breakfast. When the Sri Lankan statement came within hours, he broke his fast and claimed victory. After he broke the so-called fast, Sri Lanka said there was no ceasefire. As someone said it was a “fast between breakfast and lunch”. The “fast” – a weapon used by Mahatma Gandhi – lost its credibility long ago when every politician used it to blackmail his opponents. Now, Karunanidhi made the very expression a joke and poor Mahathma must be turning in his grave. Congress, being a staunch supporter of DMK chief, must share his sins as well and it will definitely have its impact on the poll prospects of both the parties in Tamil Nadu. After all, you can’t fool the people all the time.
In all probability “Jai Ho” may be for Indian democracy, but difficult to say whether it will be for the Congress. It is quite a funny situation that its leader who is spearheading the poll campaign with her family is not the contender for power and nominates a person who is not even contesting the elections leave alone leading the campaign.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Friday, April 24, 2009
IRRATIONAL NEWS JUDGEMENT
Death of a 17-year old student, whatever the circumstances, is certainly tragic and regrettable. For that matter, any death under circumstances which are not normal will be viewed with concern. Therefore, when Aakriti Bhatia, a student of Modern School in New Delhi died at such a young age, one can understand the agony of her parents, relatives and classmates. Their ire directed against the school management is also not something out of place.
Having said that, can we say that the media, especially the electronic media, behaved with a sense of proportion and responsibility? Certainly not. On a day when the nation was in the thick of 2nd phase of polling, the national channels were concentrating on the disquiet in one of the New Delhi school premises throughout the day and into their prime bulletins with mikes thrust on anyone who has something to do with Aakriti. This was the lead story extending anywhere between 10 to 12 minutes in each of the hourly bulletins of almost all the national news channels on Thursday and there was follow up on Friday as well. There were interviews with Aakriti’s father, mother, uncle, aunt and classmates and whoever claimed to have known her. The longer the cameras were focused on the young students, shriller was their voice. Principal was ghearoed. Teachers and students started shouting slogans. There was a demand for the resignation of the Principal of the school, Goldie Malhotra. The protestors wanted the Principal to be tried for murder. And every bit was covered. On Friday, too, the media focus was on the delay in the registration of FIR by the Police and the demand for the resignation of the Principal of the school. The media did not think that there could be any other dimension to the story except the raw emotions of the relatives and friends of Aakriti. The intensity of the media coverage was such that the Delhi government was forced to order a suo motu enquiry into the incident.
The facts, as reported in The Hindu and The New Indian Express among the Hyderabad dailies (Feb 24), were like this. Aakriti Bhatia was an asthmatic and she developed breathing problems while she was in the school. Her mother was informed by the school authorities and she sent a car to take her home. Meanwhile, since Aakriti’s condition deteriorated, she was taken in another car to a hospital. On her way to hospital, she spoke to her mother, but unfortunately before she could reach the hospital she died. Aakriti’s parents were naturally upset and angry and blamed the Principal for negligence and lack of sensitivity. There was a gap of 45 minutes between the time she took ill and the time she was taken to hospital because the school waited for the car sent by her mother. Aakriti’s school mates alleged that the oxygen mask was taken off deliberately on the way to hospital. In their moment of grief they might have come out with emotional statements and the media should have been discreet enough to use its news judgement in the telecast of bytes rather than trying to sensationalise every bit of the entire episode. It is possible that the mask was taken off since Aakriti wanted to speak to her mother as she was on her way to hospital and that might have proved fatal for Aakriti. One is not sure. Only an enquiry can bring out the truth.
But the media did not want to wait as it could not resist the temptation to sensationalise the tragic event. There are government schools which lack the basic facilities like pucca building, drinking water, toilets etc, leave alone emergency medical care. Except for dealing with them in occasional documentaries, does the media bother about them? Do they bother about the malnourished students in government schools? Had Aakriti been in a distant state like Kerala, Assam or Orissa, would media care to highlight the event in the same manner? When will our national media get out of its Delhi-centric approach to news judgement?
There will be no quarrel with the media if it has reported the event on Monday and also followed it up when there was commotion in the school when students, parents and teachers disrupted the press meet organised by the school like any other city story. But that was not to be. Defying all sense of proportion, the entire electronic media, as was pointed out in the Hoot, lived off this story for two days. May be, it will continue for some more days, one can’t say.
Prestigious schools like Modern School will have atleast a couple of thousands of students and one cannot expect academic institutions to function like emergency medical centres. The criticism will hold good had it been a hospital. Schools are not equipped to take care of medical emergencies and at worst Aakriti episode can be an error of judgement. It is not uncommon for students to fall sick while at school like stomach upsets, fever etc and the class teacher attends to such problems as the situation warrants depending on the medical history of the individual student. In the case of Aakriti, was there no accountability for her parents? When she is a known asthmatic, parents also should have ensured that she always carried emergency medical aid like inhalers, nebulisers etc which would have given her instant relief. However, one does not know whether she carried such medications with her and did not use them.
While criticising the media for its over-reaction and sensationalisation of news, we can’t ignore an emerging trend in public life these days indicative of growing intolerance and hyper-sensitivity to issues that are quite trivial. It is difficult to say for sure whether it feeds on the media practitioners tendency to give undue importance to stories with a view to sensationalise them or the media is only reflecting such tendencies. It is like chicken and egg story.
Having said that, can we say that the media, especially the electronic media, behaved with a sense of proportion and responsibility? Certainly not. On a day when the nation was in the thick of 2nd phase of polling, the national channels were concentrating on the disquiet in one of the New Delhi school premises throughout the day and into their prime bulletins with mikes thrust on anyone who has something to do with Aakriti. This was the lead story extending anywhere between 10 to 12 minutes in each of the hourly bulletins of almost all the national news channels on Thursday and there was follow up on Friday as well. There were interviews with Aakriti’s father, mother, uncle, aunt and classmates and whoever claimed to have known her. The longer the cameras were focused on the young students, shriller was their voice. Principal was ghearoed. Teachers and students started shouting slogans. There was a demand for the resignation of the Principal of the school, Goldie Malhotra. The protestors wanted the Principal to be tried for murder. And every bit was covered. On Friday, too, the media focus was on the delay in the registration of FIR by the Police and the demand for the resignation of the Principal of the school. The media did not think that there could be any other dimension to the story except the raw emotions of the relatives and friends of Aakriti. The intensity of the media coverage was such that the Delhi government was forced to order a suo motu enquiry into the incident.
The facts, as reported in The Hindu and The New Indian Express among the Hyderabad dailies (Feb 24), were like this. Aakriti Bhatia was an asthmatic and she developed breathing problems while she was in the school. Her mother was informed by the school authorities and she sent a car to take her home. Meanwhile, since Aakriti’s condition deteriorated, she was taken in another car to a hospital. On her way to hospital, she spoke to her mother, but unfortunately before she could reach the hospital she died. Aakriti’s parents were naturally upset and angry and blamed the Principal for negligence and lack of sensitivity. There was a gap of 45 minutes between the time she took ill and the time she was taken to hospital because the school waited for the car sent by her mother. Aakriti’s school mates alleged that the oxygen mask was taken off deliberately on the way to hospital. In their moment of grief they might have come out with emotional statements and the media should have been discreet enough to use its news judgement in the telecast of bytes rather than trying to sensationalise every bit of the entire episode. It is possible that the mask was taken off since Aakriti wanted to speak to her mother as she was on her way to hospital and that might have proved fatal for Aakriti. One is not sure. Only an enquiry can bring out the truth.
But the media did not want to wait as it could not resist the temptation to sensationalise the tragic event. There are government schools which lack the basic facilities like pucca building, drinking water, toilets etc, leave alone emergency medical care. Except for dealing with them in occasional documentaries, does the media bother about them? Do they bother about the malnourished students in government schools? Had Aakriti been in a distant state like Kerala, Assam or Orissa, would media care to highlight the event in the same manner? When will our national media get out of its Delhi-centric approach to news judgement?
There will be no quarrel with the media if it has reported the event on Monday and also followed it up when there was commotion in the school when students, parents and teachers disrupted the press meet organised by the school like any other city story. But that was not to be. Defying all sense of proportion, the entire electronic media, as was pointed out in the Hoot, lived off this story for two days. May be, it will continue for some more days, one can’t say.
Prestigious schools like Modern School will have atleast a couple of thousands of students and one cannot expect academic institutions to function like emergency medical centres. The criticism will hold good had it been a hospital. Schools are not equipped to take care of medical emergencies and at worst Aakriti episode can be an error of judgement. It is not uncommon for students to fall sick while at school like stomach upsets, fever etc and the class teacher attends to such problems as the situation warrants depending on the medical history of the individual student. In the case of Aakriti, was there no accountability for her parents? When she is a known asthmatic, parents also should have ensured that she always carried emergency medical aid like inhalers, nebulisers etc which would have given her instant relief. However, one does not know whether she carried such medications with her and did not use them.
While criticising the media for its over-reaction and sensationalisation of news, we can’t ignore an emerging trend in public life these days indicative of growing intolerance and hyper-sensitivity to issues that are quite trivial. It is difficult to say for sure whether it feeds on the media practitioners tendency to give undue importance to stories with a view to sensationalise them or the media is only reflecting such tendencies. It is like chicken and egg story.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
KARAT TO UNDO HISTORICAL BLUNDER?
If there is one leader among those who hold high moral ground in Indian politics and attracts attention not for their political worth as much as their rhetoric and still has been consistent in his poll-related statements, it is Prakash Karat of the CPI-M. He is categorical that the Left may not do business with the Congress in a post-poll scenario. He also went a step further by way of undoing the CPI-M’s historical blunder and said that the Left will not be averse to be part of the government. What he meant was that the Left will take the initiative to form the government with the help of the Third Front. Will such a situation only help the BJP? Perhaps anticipating this, he said that if the Congress wants a secular government at the Centre, it will have no alternative except to support the Left’s venture. What he did not say so explicitly was that the Congress has to support Third Front from outside if it really wanted to have a secular government. In fact, that was the premise on which the Left and UPA came together in 2004 to keep NDA at bay.
If one has to paraphrase this statement it will read like this. In order to keep the “communal forces” at bay, the Left supported the UPA from outside in 2004 and stood by Dr Manmohan Singh. But he, in his unabated love for the US and George Bush, let us down. Now, the UPA is in tatters. Almost all the allies have deserted and even the Congress is contesting the polls as a single party and not as an alliance. There is no way it can get the numbers it got in the last elections. Therefore, if the Congress nominates Dr Manmohan Singh and if the Congress fails to get atleast a working majority on its own, such a nomination has no meaning and it will have no binding on other parties. When the Congress has to depend on other parties for forming a government, why should we play second fiddle to its choice? Let there be a role reversal this time.
A similar sentiment was expressed by Sharad Pawar as well. Dr Manmohan Singh is the candidate of the Congress and not of the UPA. If the UPA has to name the PM candidate, the partners have to sit together and arrive at a consensus. He does not even say Dr Singh can be one of the candidates to be considered to arrive at a consensus. No party on the so-called secular divide seems to be enamoured of the candidature of Dr Singh. But the Congress protests over his “strength” are much louder. Why should any party bet on a candidate who does not even contest the elections and look forward to the party President to name him because of her own compulsions? Even after the Left slammed its door on the Congress, poor Manmohan Singh was sounding so pathetic when he said that he would still like to work with the Left and said not in so many words that it was a mistake to have chucked them out while negotiating the nuclear deal with the US. Mind you, that is the only decision he took on his own without the prior approval of his boss.
Coming back to Karat’s political prescription, who is the Left’s Prime Ministerial candidate? Does Karat want to nominate himself for the top post? Or, is there anyone in the party to fit the bill. None of the top leaders, assuming there are many, of the Left Front seems to be in the poll fray. Nor is any hint forthcoming from the party sources even as every other party has Prime Ministerial candidate in its fold. As of now, it is Sharad Pawar who has been building bridges with the Left by repeatedly suggesting to the Congress that the latter cannot even dream of forming a government without the “blessings” of the Left. And he knows very well that the Left has already made it clear that it will not support a Congress-led government and the doors will remain closed as long as Dr Singh continues to be the nominee of the Congress. Pawar’s fervent hope is in such a situation, he can perch himself for the coveted chair. A million dollar question is whether the Left will trust Pawar? There was resentment in the Left camp when Jayalalithaa suggested Pawar for the top post.
As of now, there are three parties that have made known their inclination for Pawar as a PM candidate. AIADMK supremo J Jayalalithaa has said that Pawar has experience and maturity for occupying the top executive slot of the country. Naveen Patnaik followed her and certified Pawar’s suitability. Samajwadi Party also will have no objection for Pawar and Amar Singh, prior to the formation of Fourth Front, has declared his party’s support to the Maratha leader. One does not know whether this will hold good after the troika (RJD,LJP and SP) coming together to form the Fourth Front even while claiming to be partners of the UPA.Now about the Third Front on which Karat seems to be betting heavily. Third Front comprises of CPI-M, CPI, RSP, Forward Bloc, AIADMK, PMK, MDMK, TDP, TRS, JD(S) and possibly, BSP since Mayawati is still equivocal about the combination on which she will have “jhappi and pappi” and BJD in Orissa. Even in the best possible scenario where a wave is conceded for AIADMK Front in Tamil Nadu and Mahakootami in Andhra Pradesh, Third Front cannot expect more than 140 seats including 50% of the seats for BSP in Uttar Pradesh. Karat has to necessarily depend on either the Congress or the Fourth Front. Another imponderable in the 2009 poll scenario is whether the Fourth Front will have enough numbers to extend the crucial support for the survival of a government. The Fourth Front is essentially a Front confined to UP and Bihar with a total of 120 seats. The troika has to thank its stars if it gets even 50 out of 120 seats. How can they stand by Karat. Therefore, Karat has to accept support from or extend support to the Congress with a Catch-22 situation hanging on his head. In such a scenario, AIADMK, with its allies, TDP and TRS will walk out of the Third Front. This would be an ideal dream situation for the NDA which will be waiting with open arms. In order to avert this, and to keep “communal forces” at bay, there has to be an encore of 2004. The question is who will blink first – Karat or Congress? After all in the secular-communal divide, secularism has to triumph, even if it is pseudo-secularism!!!
If one has to paraphrase this statement it will read like this. In order to keep the “communal forces” at bay, the Left supported the UPA from outside in 2004 and stood by Dr Manmohan Singh. But he, in his unabated love for the US and George Bush, let us down. Now, the UPA is in tatters. Almost all the allies have deserted and even the Congress is contesting the polls as a single party and not as an alliance. There is no way it can get the numbers it got in the last elections. Therefore, if the Congress nominates Dr Manmohan Singh and if the Congress fails to get atleast a working majority on its own, such a nomination has no meaning and it will have no binding on other parties. When the Congress has to depend on other parties for forming a government, why should we play second fiddle to its choice? Let there be a role reversal this time.
A similar sentiment was expressed by Sharad Pawar as well. Dr Manmohan Singh is the candidate of the Congress and not of the UPA. If the UPA has to name the PM candidate, the partners have to sit together and arrive at a consensus. He does not even say Dr Singh can be one of the candidates to be considered to arrive at a consensus. No party on the so-called secular divide seems to be enamoured of the candidature of Dr Singh. But the Congress protests over his “strength” are much louder. Why should any party bet on a candidate who does not even contest the elections and look forward to the party President to name him because of her own compulsions? Even after the Left slammed its door on the Congress, poor Manmohan Singh was sounding so pathetic when he said that he would still like to work with the Left and said not in so many words that it was a mistake to have chucked them out while negotiating the nuclear deal with the US. Mind you, that is the only decision he took on his own without the prior approval of his boss.
Coming back to Karat’s political prescription, who is the Left’s Prime Ministerial candidate? Does Karat want to nominate himself for the top post? Or, is there anyone in the party to fit the bill. None of the top leaders, assuming there are many, of the Left Front seems to be in the poll fray. Nor is any hint forthcoming from the party sources even as every other party has Prime Ministerial candidate in its fold. As of now, it is Sharad Pawar who has been building bridges with the Left by repeatedly suggesting to the Congress that the latter cannot even dream of forming a government without the “blessings” of the Left. And he knows very well that the Left has already made it clear that it will not support a Congress-led government and the doors will remain closed as long as Dr Singh continues to be the nominee of the Congress. Pawar’s fervent hope is in such a situation, he can perch himself for the coveted chair. A million dollar question is whether the Left will trust Pawar? There was resentment in the Left camp when Jayalalithaa suggested Pawar for the top post.
As of now, there are three parties that have made known their inclination for Pawar as a PM candidate. AIADMK supremo J Jayalalithaa has said that Pawar has experience and maturity for occupying the top executive slot of the country. Naveen Patnaik followed her and certified Pawar’s suitability. Samajwadi Party also will have no objection for Pawar and Amar Singh, prior to the formation of Fourth Front, has declared his party’s support to the Maratha leader. One does not know whether this will hold good after the troika (RJD,LJP and SP) coming together to form the Fourth Front even while claiming to be partners of the UPA.Now about the Third Front on which Karat seems to be betting heavily. Third Front comprises of CPI-M, CPI, RSP, Forward Bloc, AIADMK, PMK, MDMK, TDP, TRS, JD(S) and possibly, BSP since Mayawati is still equivocal about the combination on which she will have “jhappi and pappi” and BJD in Orissa. Even in the best possible scenario where a wave is conceded for AIADMK Front in Tamil Nadu and Mahakootami in Andhra Pradesh, Third Front cannot expect more than 140 seats including 50% of the seats for BSP in Uttar Pradesh. Karat has to necessarily depend on either the Congress or the Fourth Front. Another imponderable in the 2009 poll scenario is whether the Fourth Front will have enough numbers to extend the crucial support for the survival of a government. The Fourth Front is essentially a Front confined to UP and Bihar with a total of 120 seats. The troika has to thank its stars if it gets even 50 out of 120 seats. How can they stand by Karat. Therefore, Karat has to accept support from or extend support to the Congress with a Catch-22 situation hanging on his head. In such a scenario, AIADMK, with its allies, TDP and TRS will walk out of the Third Front. This would be an ideal dream situation for the NDA which will be waiting with open arms. In order to avert this, and to keep “communal forces” at bay, there has to be an encore of 2004. The question is who will blink first – Karat or Congress? After all in the secular-communal divide, secularism has to triumph, even if it is pseudo-secularism!!!
Monday, April 20, 2009
VARUN MANIA
The first phase of polling for the 2009 elections was being held on April 16. Naturally, one would have expected full length coverage of the excitement that went with the greatest day of democracy when voters lined up before the polling booths. But what dominated the small screen of news channels on that day was Varun Gandhi. Cameras were positioned before the main gate of Etah Jail where Varun was kept for a couple of weeks, to capture the scene when Varun walks out of jail on 2 week parole granted by the Supreme Court.
Obviously, the jail authorities have their own formalities to complete before allowing anyone to walk out. But the channel anchors had no patience. Times Now anchor Arnab Goswami must be honoured at the next award function for television anchoring for his speculation which amounted to misleading his viewers no end.
When the cameras were positioned around 2.00 pm and there was no hint of Varun coming out, Arnab was sharing his doubt with his panellists. First, he said that Maneka Gandhi and her aides are inside and there seems to be some wordy duel with the jail authorities which is causing the delay. Then, his speculation was yet another wild guess. Was it because the BJP was waiting to gather enough people for a ruckus and hence they are delaying. We have to pity his naivety. Will the jail authorities keep him inside in order to oblige the BJP whose hostility with the ruling establishment in Uttar Pradesh is common knowledge?
Arnab has been constantly asking perhaps the viewers: “What is happening? Look at the crowd. They are so restive and they might create trouble. Why did they allow such a massive crowd to assemble there?” He seemed to have got the news, from where God knows, that Varun might be taken in a rally to Bareilly and from there to Philibit. Arnab got more worried. “Why is the BJP doing this? It is a sure invitation for trouble. Probably, they want to milk this event to the maximum”. Then some communal remarks were attributed to the local MLA, even as he was denying it in another channel. The speculation that floated was that some Muslim jail official is delaying the release of Varun.
It was left to the NDTV to come out with the actual reason for the delay. The Jail superintendent is reported to have said that he cannot accept a photo copy of the Supreme court order and that the original has to be presented to him and that was the direction he allegedly got from his higher-ups. So, the original copy had to be brought from Delhi to Etah.
Interestingly, when Varun actually came out of the prison around 6.30 PM, Arnab was showing preparations for IPL in South Africa. It was NDTV who beat them in the game with the first visuals and realistic information without any hyperboles or concern for law and order that was put up for public consumption. As it ultimately turned out, Varun was taken in an SUV from Etah to Agra by road and from there by air to Delhi. Neither was there any rally nor was the crowd unmanageable after seeing its media-created leader.
This is yet another occasion when the undue hype over an issue made the media to come out with all sorts of misinformation and disinformation. What happened to the self-regulation?
Obviously, the jail authorities have their own formalities to complete before allowing anyone to walk out. But the channel anchors had no patience. Times Now anchor Arnab Goswami must be honoured at the next award function for television anchoring for his speculation which amounted to misleading his viewers no end.
When the cameras were positioned around 2.00 pm and there was no hint of Varun coming out, Arnab was sharing his doubt with his panellists. First, he said that Maneka Gandhi and her aides are inside and there seems to be some wordy duel with the jail authorities which is causing the delay. Then, his speculation was yet another wild guess. Was it because the BJP was waiting to gather enough people for a ruckus and hence they are delaying. We have to pity his naivety. Will the jail authorities keep him inside in order to oblige the BJP whose hostility with the ruling establishment in Uttar Pradesh is common knowledge?
Arnab has been constantly asking perhaps the viewers: “What is happening? Look at the crowd. They are so restive and they might create trouble. Why did they allow such a massive crowd to assemble there?” He seemed to have got the news, from where God knows, that Varun might be taken in a rally to Bareilly and from there to Philibit. Arnab got more worried. “Why is the BJP doing this? It is a sure invitation for trouble. Probably, they want to milk this event to the maximum”. Then some communal remarks were attributed to the local MLA, even as he was denying it in another channel. The speculation that floated was that some Muslim jail official is delaying the release of Varun.
It was left to the NDTV to come out with the actual reason for the delay. The Jail superintendent is reported to have said that he cannot accept a photo copy of the Supreme court order and that the original has to be presented to him and that was the direction he allegedly got from his higher-ups. So, the original copy had to be brought from Delhi to Etah.
Interestingly, when Varun actually came out of the prison around 6.30 PM, Arnab was showing preparations for IPL in South Africa. It was NDTV who beat them in the game with the first visuals and realistic information without any hyperboles or concern for law and order that was put up for public consumption. As it ultimately turned out, Varun was taken in an SUV from Etah to Agra by road and from there by air to Delhi. Neither was there any rally nor was the crowd unmanageable after seeing its media-created leader.
This is yet another occasion when the undue hype over an issue made the media to come out with all sorts of misinformation and disinformation. What happened to the self-regulation?
Friday, April 17, 2009
NOMINATION IS THE NORM
When AICC President Sonia Gandhi’s “inner voice” told her that she should “renounce” the top post of the country, especially after her call on the then President Dr Abdul Kalam, the choice for the Prime Ministership of our great democracy fell on a pliable, gentle, soft-spoken and an efficient economist, Dr Manmohan Singh, who ushered in economic reforms under the tutelage of late PV Narasimha Rao. There were senior leaders and old war horses in the party who had much more administrative and political experience like Pranab Mukerjee, Arjun Singh than Dr Singh. They may not have had strong political base in their respective states, though Arjun Singh had once upon a time; but they had gone through the electoral mill on many occasions. They were politically sharp. The choice did not fall on them, but on Dr Singh who by upbringing and temperament is quite apolitical and that is the reason he earned the goodwill of every section as a suave, non-corrupt and gentleman Prime Minister in the initial days.
But there is a metamorphosis in him during the run-up to the polls and what we see today is a different Singh who is aggressive nit-picking and who doesn’t hesitate to use expressions which are not considered civil in political discourse and does not behove the status of a Prime Minister. Sonia Gandhi may say that Prime Minister represents the entire country and any insult to him is an insult to the nation. But then, by the same token, the Prime Minister also should conduct himself in a manner that brings dignity to his office. He can’t stoop down to the level he did with prepared speeches in press conferences.
Why is Dr Singh considered “weak” in the perception of some. The convention in the Congress party right from the days of Indira Gandhi was that the Parliamentary party has only to endorse someone nominated by the Party president. Since Pranab and Arjun were not fully trusted by the high command for different reasons, Dr Manmohan Singh came quite handy. Never mind he had never been elected to the Lok Sabha and there is no state where he had a support base to get elected on his own political strength even for the post of a Councillor. So, he became a Prime Minister by proxy. The mantle fell on him not because he has been able to campaign effectively and sway the masses to mobilise numbers for the Congress to pip the winning post. Nor was it because he enjoyed the majority support of the Congress Parliamentary party. He has been there on 7 Race Course Road for full term because he is such a gentleman that he would not dare defy those who nominated him. Even for the 2009 polls, he was not allowed to contest for Lok Sabha, but has to be nominated by Sonia once again. The Congress which rejects the charge of “weak” PM has to explain to the nation as to why he is not contesting the polls, but is dependent on Sonia to extend his stay in Race Course road.
NDA’s Prime Ministerial candidate Lal Krishna Advani’s accusation against Dr Singh that he was the “weakest” Prime Minister the country ever had has to be understood in this context. That the buck did not stop with him is also not a personal attack. But the BJP spokespersons went a bit far when they called Dr Singh “glorified caretaker” “night watchman” etc and it was not in good taste. Were they provoked to make such personal attacks by Congress leaders like Kapil Sibal, Abishek Manu Singhvi and co. The limit was when Sonia Gandhi called Advani a “slave of RSS”. It does not lie in the mouth of any Congress leader, much less the Congress President, to call someone a slave because of slave-running is the principal avocation of the first family. The entire flock of Congressmen genuflect before the Gandhi family and the manner in which the Congressmen project any scion of the Nehru Gandhi family would put anyone who has the slightest regard for democracy to shame. What are the credentials of Rahul Gandhi to be portrayed along with Sonia and Manmohan? Yes, for her sister Priyanka, Rahul may be great, hard-working and can one day become the Prime Minister of the country. But the point is there are thousands of hard-working young men in this country and belonging to political families. After all, they don’t belong to the Nehru-Gandhi family and so they cannot aspire for the top post.
Coming back to the “slave of RSS” accusation, yes, Sonia may be partially right. BJP is the political wing of the RSS and the latter has youth wing, women’s wing, labour wing, student wing,etc, and BJP leaders have their umbilical cord tied to the RSS. It is an undeniable fact. Well, there is a difference. RSS is a mass-based organisation whether one agrees with its ideology or not and it claims to have intra-organisational debates and discussions before formulating its opinion on any vital issue. Most of the BJP leaders were groomed by the RSS. But the occupant of No 10 Janpath is just an individual and what she says is law for the party and the government. Moreover, it is in the DNA of Congressmen to pay obeisance at the door of the Nehru-Gandhi family. There was only one issue on which Dr Manmohan Singh had his way and that was the Indo-US nuclear deal. Sonia too had to yield to Dr Singh since she did not have any option. At the fag end of the term of the UPA government, she could not have opted for change of guard.
All this does not answer the basic question. Why did the political debate become so personal, dirty and acrimonious as never before. Why did the Congress extend the privilege to Advani to be brought to the centre-stage of electoral debate while denying him the privilege of considering him as alternative Prime Ministerial candidate. That is what the party said when it rejected the invitation of the NDA for a television debate.
There is an element of frustration in the Congress since important allies like RJD, LJP, SP, and NCP are charting their own political course even as they claim to be part of UPA. Congress is on a weak wicket in Tamil Nadu where it has allied with the DMK. Sonia knows that the country is aware of the fact that it was she who is calling the shot and Dr Singh is just an implementer and a faithful implementer at that. That is the reason the charge of Advani hurts Sonia and Dr Singh. The only way to deflect attention from this charge is to go on the offensive.
Advani is singled out because he is the only Prime Ministerial candidate in the fray among non-Congress parties while others are fighting shy of entering the ring. In a post-poll scenario, the Congress needs all non-BJP parties’ support. Hence, it cannot antagonise Lalu Prasad Yadav, Ramvilas Paswan, Mulayam Singh, Sharad Pawar, Naveen Patnaik, Deve Gowda, Jayalalithaa. Of course, Dr Singh has already made it clear that he would be too happy to work with the Left after the polls. Efforts are on to woo Nitish Kumar of JD(U) also. A clearer picture is therefore emerging. The Congress would like to do business with all the non-BJP parties after the polls to get the magic number as it is not sure of repeating its own 2004 performance. That is the reason, the party is not focussing on any issues and is readily swallowing all the insults from its allies while relentlessly targeting Advani.
But there is a metamorphosis in him during the run-up to the polls and what we see today is a different Singh who is aggressive nit-picking and who doesn’t hesitate to use expressions which are not considered civil in political discourse and does not behove the status of a Prime Minister. Sonia Gandhi may say that Prime Minister represents the entire country and any insult to him is an insult to the nation. But then, by the same token, the Prime Minister also should conduct himself in a manner that brings dignity to his office. He can’t stoop down to the level he did with prepared speeches in press conferences.
Why is Dr Singh considered “weak” in the perception of some. The convention in the Congress party right from the days of Indira Gandhi was that the Parliamentary party has only to endorse someone nominated by the Party president. Since Pranab and Arjun were not fully trusted by the high command for different reasons, Dr Manmohan Singh came quite handy. Never mind he had never been elected to the Lok Sabha and there is no state where he had a support base to get elected on his own political strength even for the post of a Councillor. So, he became a Prime Minister by proxy. The mantle fell on him not because he has been able to campaign effectively and sway the masses to mobilise numbers for the Congress to pip the winning post. Nor was it because he enjoyed the majority support of the Congress Parliamentary party. He has been there on 7 Race Course Road for full term because he is such a gentleman that he would not dare defy those who nominated him. Even for the 2009 polls, he was not allowed to contest for Lok Sabha, but has to be nominated by Sonia once again. The Congress which rejects the charge of “weak” PM has to explain to the nation as to why he is not contesting the polls, but is dependent on Sonia to extend his stay in Race Course road.
NDA’s Prime Ministerial candidate Lal Krishna Advani’s accusation against Dr Singh that he was the “weakest” Prime Minister the country ever had has to be understood in this context. That the buck did not stop with him is also not a personal attack. But the BJP spokespersons went a bit far when they called Dr Singh “glorified caretaker” “night watchman” etc and it was not in good taste. Were they provoked to make such personal attacks by Congress leaders like Kapil Sibal, Abishek Manu Singhvi and co. The limit was when Sonia Gandhi called Advani a “slave of RSS”. It does not lie in the mouth of any Congress leader, much less the Congress President, to call someone a slave because of slave-running is the principal avocation of the first family. The entire flock of Congressmen genuflect before the Gandhi family and the manner in which the Congressmen project any scion of the Nehru Gandhi family would put anyone who has the slightest regard for democracy to shame. What are the credentials of Rahul Gandhi to be portrayed along with Sonia and Manmohan? Yes, for her sister Priyanka, Rahul may be great, hard-working and can one day become the Prime Minister of the country. But the point is there are thousands of hard-working young men in this country and belonging to political families. After all, they don’t belong to the Nehru-Gandhi family and so they cannot aspire for the top post.
Coming back to the “slave of RSS” accusation, yes, Sonia may be partially right. BJP is the political wing of the RSS and the latter has youth wing, women’s wing, labour wing, student wing,etc, and BJP leaders have their umbilical cord tied to the RSS. It is an undeniable fact. Well, there is a difference. RSS is a mass-based organisation whether one agrees with its ideology or not and it claims to have intra-organisational debates and discussions before formulating its opinion on any vital issue. Most of the BJP leaders were groomed by the RSS. But the occupant of No 10 Janpath is just an individual and what she says is law for the party and the government. Moreover, it is in the DNA of Congressmen to pay obeisance at the door of the Nehru-Gandhi family. There was only one issue on which Dr Manmohan Singh had his way and that was the Indo-US nuclear deal. Sonia too had to yield to Dr Singh since she did not have any option. At the fag end of the term of the UPA government, she could not have opted for change of guard.
All this does not answer the basic question. Why did the political debate become so personal, dirty and acrimonious as never before. Why did the Congress extend the privilege to Advani to be brought to the centre-stage of electoral debate while denying him the privilege of considering him as alternative Prime Ministerial candidate. That is what the party said when it rejected the invitation of the NDA for a television debate.
There is an element of frustration in the Congress since important allies like RJD, LJP, SP, and NCP are charting their own political course even as they claim to be part of UPA. Congress is on a weak wicket in Tamil Nadu where it has allied with the DMK. Sonia knows that the country is aware of the fact that it was she who is calling the shot and Dr Singh is just an implementer and a faithful implementer at that. That is the reason the charge of Advani hurts Sonia and Dr Singh. The only way to deflect attention from this charge is to go on the offensive.
Advani is singled out because he is the only Prime Ministerial candidate in the fray among non-Congress parties while others are fighting shy of entering the ring. In a post-poll scenario, the Congress needs all non-BJP parties’ support. Hence, it cannot antagonise Lalu Prasad Yadav, Ramvilas Paswan, Mulayam Singh, Sharad Pawar, Naveen Patnaik, Deve Gowda, Jayalalithaa. Of course, Dr Singh has already made it clear that he would be too happy to work with the Left after the polls. Efforts are on to woo Nitish Kumar of JD(U) also. A clearer picture is therefore emerging. The Congress would like to do business with all the non-BJP parties after the polls to get the magic number as it is not sure of repeating its own 2004 performance. That is the reason, the party is not focussing on any issues and is readily swallowing all the insults from its allies while relentlessly targeting Advani.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
SECULAR VOTES
By S R Ramanujan
Citizens of this country have been familiar with the oft-repeated expression coined especially by the dwindling Left forces. That was the label given to select combination of parties clubbing them together as “Left, Democratic and Secular forces”. It is passé. Now the language is different. It is “either you are with us or with our enemy” language. Either you are “secular” and “inclusive” or your are “communal” and “divisive”. The Left, as we all know, is quite adept at labelling depending on their convenience and on whose side the party is. Any party that distances itself from Sangh parivar is a secular party. For the CPI-M in Kerala, Abdul Nasser Madani’s “Peoples Democratic Party” is a secular party, never mind Madani’s earlier avatar as a rabid communalist, founder of Islamic Sevak Sangh and now against whom there is growing evidence of alleged terror links which the chief minister of Kerala himself wants to investigate. Biju Janata Dal is “communal” so long as it had an alliance with the BJP. Now that it has severed its connection with the BJP and is the darling of the Left, it has become “secular”. One can do business with them. AIADMK’s Jayalalithaa, who had never hidden her proximity to the Hindu cause whether it is Ayodhya, Gujarat or Ram Sethu, was communal as long as she sailed with the BJP, particularly during the last elections. Now that she has alliance with the Left, as a tactical retreat to take on her first enemy Karunanidhi, she must be “secular” in the estimation of Karat and Co.
Another political phrase that is hurled at the enemy by the so-called “secular forces” is that such parties represent “divisive forces”. A party that wants Uniform Civil Code so as to have one law for all citizens irrespective of caste or religion is a “divisive force”. A party that may not hesitate to run counter to the letter and spirit of the Constitution just to get Muslim votes, like in the case of Shah Bano, or proscription of “Satanic Verses” or the way we treated Taslima, will be branded as “secular” and inclusive in its political philosophy. If Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) chief, Lalu Prasad Yadav or his new ally, Lok Janasakthi Party (LJP) chief Ram VilasPaswan, go about their poll campaign with Osama bin Laden’s look alike during the previous polls to placate Muslim voters, do they or their parties represent unifying forces. Is it “inclusive” politics? Yes, according to our secular pundits. After all, they fight the “obscurantic” forces like the BJP.
If the Andhra Pradesh Congress Committee chief D Srinivas says he would cut the hands of those who oppose Muslims, it is not “divisive” and not “communal”, but Varun Gandhi’s support for majority and his outburst against the minorities are communal and are out to destroy the social fabric of our society. Interestingly enough, it was only the media and the so-called secular hacks who were egging on the Muslims for retaliation while the community itself did not take Varun seriously and fortunately there was no communal violence even after a month or so. If there is a competition between Uttar Pradesh chief minister Mayawati and Samajwadi Party chief Mulayam Singh Yadav to garner Muslims votes, their parties are secular and if BJP raises Temple issue with an eye on Hindu votes, it is communal politics. If RJD chief threatens Varun to crush him under road roller had he been a Home Minister, he is preaching communal harmony! Because his party is deemed to be “secular” and so he cannot incite communal passion.
Take the case of our Harvard educated Home Minister P Chidambaram. He says that unless we fight and vanquish communalism we cannot fight terrorism. What communalism did Pakistan and Bangladesh practice for terrorism to take deeper roots in those countries and for export to their neighbours. Is it not a fact that the Congress government’s unabashedly short-sighted policy in allowing illegal migrants from Bangladesh to settle in the North East that contributed to the menace of terrorism that we witness today in the region? What he probably means is that the Congress party will continue to pamper a particular community for votes and if any party opposes such a policy, that party will be dubbed “communal” and that party is promoting “communalism”.
Chidambaram has an astonishing explanation for not hanging Afzal Guru who is awaiting capital punishment. According to Chidambaram, some parties are seeing this issue through the “prism of religion”. May be, it is a Freudian slip or the boot is on the other leg. It is the government that does not want to hang him because of his religion. True, some more are in the queue awaiting the noose. But, the government had every reason to jump the queue so as to demonstrate its zero tolerance against terrorism. Action should have had a telling effect than pious statements about zero tolerance.
When we talk about Chidambaram, we are necessarily reminded of the shoe attack though the attack was not personally aimed at him. But the shoe achieved what pen or sword could not achieve though the journalist tribe boasts that pen is mightier than sword. But an unfortunate fall-out of this episode could be that many activists will try this strategy in future as it is paying dividends. In fact, Jarnail Singh’s act also was not original. He only followed the “foot”steps of Iraqi journalist Muntadhar al-Zaidi who flung his shoe at George Bush and this was followed by similar “Paduka Seva” in China, Sweden and our own Supreme Court. But Jarnail Singh achieved what political parties with their agitational approach could not achieve for decades. Just a shoe could put the mighty Congress on a spot.
Similar is the case of Varun Gandhi’s speech and the attention it drew all over. He must have spoken in a gathering of some three to four hundred people in a remote border village. Thanks to our hyperactive media, the CD of his alleged hate speech is the most sought after one by various parties for various purposes. That is not all. Leaders of different parties are using the same lingua for different effects like our APCC president.
Besides secular parties and secular forces, we talk, these days, of “secular votes”. Ours is the only democracy where we have categorised the votes of our people into “secular votes” and by extension “communal votes”. If we take into account the votes polled by the two major national parties, more or less equal number of the electorate are either “secular” or “communal”. In 2004 polls, BJP had polled 8,63,71,561 votes (22.16%) and in 1998 polls, the vote percentage of the party was 25.61% with total votes of 9,42,66,188. The Congress polled 101,34,08,949 (26.53%) in 2004 and its percentage of votes in UP and Bihar was 12.04 and 4.49 respectively. In Madhya Pradesh, BJP had a vote share of 48.13% while Congress had 34.07%. Does this hold any lesson for our secular parties and politicians? It is for the secular parties to introspect whether it is proper to look at the electorate through the prism of their own prejudices. What more can be “divisive politics” than this?
Citizens of this country have been familiar with the oft-repeated expression coined especially by the dwindling Left forces. That was the label given to select combination of parties clubbing them together as “Left, Democratic and Secular forces”. It is passé. Now the language is different. It is “either you are with us or with our enemy” language. Either you are “secular” and “inclusive” or your are “communal” and “divisive”. The Left, as we all know, is quite adept at labelling depending on their convenience and on whose side the party is. Any party that distances itself from Sangh parivar is a secular party. For the CPI-M in Kerala, Abdul Nasser Madani’s “Peoples Democratic Party” is a secular party, never mind Madani’s earlier avatar as a rabid communalist, founder of Islamic Sevak Sangh and now against whom there is growing evidence of alleged terror links which the chief minister of Kerala himself wants to investigate. Biju Janata Dal is “communal” so long as it had an alliance with the BJP. Now that it has severed its connection with the BJP and is the darling of the Left, it has become “secular”. One can do business with them. AIADMK’s Jayalalithaa, who had never hidden her proximity to the Hindu cause whether it is Ayodhya, Gujarat or Ram Sethu, was communal as long as she sailed with the BJP, particularly during the last elections. Now that she has alliance with the Left, as a tactical retreat to take on her first enemy Karunanidhi, she must be “secular” in the estimation of Karat and Co.
Another political phrase that is hurled at the enemy by the so-called “secular forces” is that such parties represent “divisive forces”. A party that wants Uniform Civil Code so as to have one law for all citizens irrespective of caste or religion is a “divisive force”. A party that may not hesitate to run counter to the letter and spirit of the Constitution just to get Muslim votes, like in the case of Shah Bano, or proscription of “Satanic Verses” or the way we treated Taslima, will be branded as “secular” and inclusive in its political philosophy. If Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD) chief, Lalu Prasad Yadav or his new ally, Lok Janasakthi Party (LJP) chief Ram VilasPaswan, go about their poll campaign with Osama bin Laden’s look alike during the previous polls to placate Muslim voters, do they or their parties represent unifying forces. Is it “inclusive” politics? Yes, according to our secular pundits. After all, they fight the “obscurantic” forces like the BJP.
If the Andhra Pradesh Congress Committee chief D Srinivas says he would cut the hands of those who oppose Muslims, it is not “divisive” and not “communal”, but Varun Gandhi’s support for majority and his outburst against the minorities are communal and are out to destroy the social fabric of our society. Interestingly enough, it was only the media and the so-called secular hacks who were egging on the Muslims for retaliation while the community itself did not take Varun seriously and fortunately there was no communal violence even after a month or so. If there is a competition between Uttar Pradesh chief minister Mayawati and Samajwadi Party chief Mulayam Singh Yadav to garner Muslims votes, their parties are secular and if BJP raises Temple issue with an eye on Hindu votes, it is communal politics. If RJD chief threatens Varun to crush him under road roller had he been a Home Minister, he is preaching communal harmony! Because his party is deemed to be “secular” and so he cannot incite communal passion.
Take the case of our Harvard educated Home Minister P Chidambaram. He says that unless we fight and vanquish communalism we cannot fight terrorism. What communalism did Pakistan and Bangladesh practice for terrorism to take deeper roots in those countries and for export to their neighbours. Is it not a fact that the Congress government’s unabashedly short-sighted policy in allowing illegal migrants from Bangladesh to settle in the North East that contributed to the menace of terrorism that we witness today in the region? What he probably means is that the Congress party will continue to pamper a particular community for votes and if any party opposes such a policy, that party will be dubbed “communal” and that party is promoting “communalism”.
Chidambaram has an astonishing explanation for not hanging Afzal Guru who is awaiting capital punishment. According to Chidambaram, some parties are seeing this issue through the “prism of religion”. May be, it is a Freudian slip or the boot is on the other leg. It is the government that does not want to hang him because of his religion. True, some more are in the queue awaiting the noose. But, the government had every reason to jump the queue so as to demonstrate its zero tolerance against terrorism. Action should have had a telling effect than pious statements about zero tolerance.
When we talk about Chidambaram, we are necessarily reminded of the shoe attack though the attack was not personally aimed at him. But the shoe achieved what pen or sword could not achieve though the journalist tribe boasts that pen is mightier than sword. But an unfortunate fall-out of this episode could be that many activists will try this strategy in future as it is paying dividends. In fact, Jarnail Singh’s act also was not original. He only followed the “foot”steps of Iraqi journalist Muntadhar al-Zaidi who flung his shoe at George Bush and this was followed by similar “Paduka Seva” in China, Sweden and our own Supreme Court. But Jarnail Singh achieved what political parties with their agitational approach could not achieve for decades. Just a shoe could put the mighty Congress on a spot.
Similar is the case of Varun Gandhi’s speech and the attention it drew all over. He must have spoken in a gathering of some three to four hundred people in a remote border village. Thanks to our hyperactive media, the CD of his alleged hate speech is the most sought after one by various parties for various purposes. That is not all. Leaders of different parties are using the same lingua for different effects like our APCC president.
Besides secular parties and secular forces, we talk, these days, of “secular votes”. Ours is the only democracy where we have categorised the votes of our people into “secular votes” and by extension “communal votes”. If we take into account the votes polled by the two major national parties, more or less equal number of the electorate are either “secular” or “communal”. In 2004 polls, BJP had polled 8,63,71,561 votes (22.16%) and in 1998 polls, the vote percentage of the party was 25.61% with total votes of 9,42,66,188. The Congress polled 101,34,08,949 (26.53%) in 2004 and its percentage of votes in UP and Bihar was 12.04 and 4.49 respectively. In Madhya Pradesh, BJP had a vote share of 48.13% while Congress had 34.07%. Does this hold any lesson for our secular parties and politicians? It is for the secular parties to introspect whether it is proper to look at the electorate through the prism of their own prejudices. What more can be “divisive politics” than this?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)