Narendra Modi's media interviews

The BJP prime ministerial candidate Shri Narendra Modi has, of late, given four media interviews in quick succession, explaining his party's policies. The first interview was by Mr Rajat Sharma, the chief editor-owner of India TV, for his "Aap Ki Adalat" programme, second to the ANI news agency, third to TV9 and the last to the CNBC-TV18. His views were sought on many questions that Modi-bashers in the media, politics and "Left-liberal-secular" class were propagating. The two issues that seeem to dominate the anti-Modi propaganda were: Modi's declining of skull cap from a Muslim visitor and unwillingness to apologise for the 2002 riots in Gujarat.

Having watched all the said interviews-Rajat Sharma's in full-I am convinced that Modi explained his attitude satisfactorily, without evasion or mincing words. Let us examine the skull cap issue: Does accepting or declining the cap determines one's secularism or its absence? In plain words, if some one does not accept a skull cap from an Indian Muslim and wear it, should he be condemned as communal and anti-Muslim? Is the skull cap a defining symbol of secularism? Why are the media and Modi's political rivals stuck on trivial matters of little significance? Concern for Muslim welfare and respect for their honourable place in the society is more important than accepting and wearing a skull cap? During Modi's 13 years of rule in Gujarat, can his critics cite anti-Muslim steps taken by his govt? Does not emphasise development for all without any discrimination?

The 2002 riots have to be dealt with separately in a proper sequence. 58 Gujarati pilgrims, men, women and children, returning from Ayodhya, were burnt alive in the Sabarmati Express train at Godhra station. There was an instantaneous reaction resulting in the tragic riot in which over 700 Muslims and 200-300 Hindus were killed. A large number of Hindus were killed in police firing. As a new comer to the office of the CM which he occupied in October 2001, four months before the bloody events, Modi was clearly overwhelmed by the suddenness of the tragedy. But, he quickly rallied and called the army within a day. The situation was brought under control within 2-3 days.

But, his political opponents whom he trounced in three successive elections from 2002 to 2012, and a section of the media have carried on a relentless campaign of calumny against him despite the fact that no court, even the apex one, has found any evidence against him. It does not matter to them that for the last 12 years there has been peace and communal harmony in the State. Even Muslim community in Gujarat has let it be known that they have prospered under Modi's development agenda. His critics want Modi to apologise. For argument sake, if Modi offers apology, will his arch enemies spare him? Will they not cite his apology as an admission of his guilt to be punished severely? He has publicly said in his interviews that if he was even slightly guilty, he should be hanged in a public square; an apology is not enough.

  

Hypocrisy of Arvind Kejriwal

The Aam Aadmi Party leader, Arvind Kejriwal, a self-acclaimed champion of India's common man(aam aadmi), has, by now, thoroughly exposed himself through his acts of commission and omission. He paraded himself as an "aam aadmi" embodiment, but he acts as "khas aadmi"-a special person-a VIP, the word he publicly detested. He continues to occupy govt-provided residence in an exclusive area in New Delhi and still moves with govt security, even though he is no more the Chief Minister of Delhi.

All along, Kejriwal was accusing the Congress and the BJP of ignoring common people and taking vital decisions in a closed room through a small group. He is doing the same thing: He and his core group selected the Lok Sabha candidates for the 2014 general election in a "closed room" and not in public consultation with his workers and supporters. For the campaign, Kejriwal chose a cavalcade of 100 cars to drive across Haryana and UP. Can this style of electioneering be regarded as "aam aadmi" approach?

Arvind Kejriwal's latest favourite strategy is to target Narendra Modi, the BJP's prime ministerial candidate, whom the media opinion polls are describing as the front-runner. He dimisses the pro-Modi "wave" in the country as fake which has been allegedly created by the TV channels, being funded by Mukesh Ambani. Without offering any proof, he is repeatedly charging both major parties with "sitting in the lap of " the Reliance chief. Thus, he has reduced himself to the status of a rabble-rouser, an street agitator, instead of growing up as a sober, dignified, mature politician with a concrete economic, political and social agenda for the welfare of the Indian people. Contrary to the media assessment of the AAP's neglible presence and impact nation-wide, Kejriwal is making tall, over-ambitious claims of winning 100 seats in the coming national elections, asserting that no government can be formed at the Centre without the help of the AAP. In other words, not yet the Prime Minister but the king-maker?  

Arvind Kejriwal resigns CM's office

Arvind Kejriwal, the leader of the Aam Aadmi Party(AAP), resigned from the office of the Chief Minisster of Delhi alongwith his cabinet on February 14 night. He took this step as he was defeated in his move to introduce his favourite Janlokpal Bill in the Assembly without the clearance of the Lt Governor as required by the procedure laid down since it had financial implications and had provisions not within the jurisdiction of the Delhi govt. The largest party-the BJP with 31, its ally, the Akali Dal 1, the Congress 8 and independents 2 voted against the introduction; the AAP 27. The BJP and the Congress leaders clarified in the House that they were not against the anti-corruption bill; they only wanted that the bill must follow the legal route prescribed for its introduction as the Lt.Governor had already sent a message to the Speaker to adhere to the necessary rules.

However, Kejriwal and his party were obstinate and defiant. He accused both major parties of conspiracy in acting against the anti-corruption measure. His sole strategy seemed inspired by his desire to quit office on the anti-graft issue to impress his supporters that he was thwarted by his opponents to cleanse the system. He was the servant of the aam aadmi and had no love for office. Hence, his martyrdom. It is quite clear that from day one-December 28, 2013, when he was sworn in as the Chief Minister of Delhi, heading a minority government of 28 MLAs in the House of 70, on the backing of its most hated enemy, the Congress party, the most corrupt political outfit in his eyes, he started acting in an anarchic manner; he was making most irresponsible, wild statements, describing the Congress and the BJP as "chor"(theives) and "bhrasht"(corrupt); Kejriwal and his associate were, presumably, the most honest and moral politicians.

Within a few days, his sanctimonious claims were thoroughly exposed as hollow and false. First, he had sworn in the name of his children that he would neither seek nor support the Congress and the BJP. However, when the BJP as the largest party declined to form the govt as it did not have required minimum majority of 36 members, the AAP agreed to form the govt with the outside support of the Congress, violating its own earlier promise. They justified it by claiming that a large number of Delhites had favoured them to take over the govt, through SMS, etc, in their self-styled "referendum. Their hypocrisy and duplicity were in the forefront when the party took all other decisions such as public dharna in front of the Rail Bhawan, drafting of the Janlokpal Bill, taking govt houses, big cars, security and finally resigning from the govt, without consulting the people. Even their first list of candidates for the Lok Sabha polls-20 seats-were done without sounding their members in the areas. Hence, there are not only protests from some constituencies, some senior aspirants have accused the leadership of selling the tickets to the highest bidders upto 25 lakhs!     

Anniversary of Kashmiri Pandits' exodus from their homeland in the Valley

January 19 is the sad day when the Hindu minority community in the Kashmir Valley-known as Kashmiri Pandits to which our first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, her daughter Indira Gandhi, his grandson Rajiv Gandhi and the ruling Congress party's de facto Prime Ministerial candidate for the 2014 elections, Rahul Gandhi, belong, was virtually driven out of their ancient homeland, many years ago. Although it was the first and the only case of its kind when Hindus, the majority community in India, but a minority group in the Muslim majority State-J&K in the Indian Union, had to flee their homes due to a campaign of persecution and a dark shadow of death and destruction hanging over them, thanks to the intolerance and hatred of a majority of their Kashmiri Muslim brethren and co-citizens, sharing the same language and heritage. Hardly any one, including the media. is really bothered about the suffering and deprivation experienced by these displaced Kashmiri Pandits, many of whom are still languishing camps in Jammu.

It was a young Kashmiri Pandit, Rashneek Kher who reminded an Indian Express columnist Ms Tavleen Singh when she was visiting the valley recently, about the tragic anniversary of the Kashmiri Pandits' exodus from their beloved homeland, urging her to write about it. He told Ms Singh that his own home had been burnt down and he had lost relatives in the violence. Kher also told her that the hostility of ordinary Kashmiri Muslims made it impossible for those Kashmiri Pandits living in terrible condition in Jammu camps to return to their homes in the valley, as most of them might have been destroyed and illegally occupied.

Writing about this horrible story of Kashmiri Pandits' travails in their own country, Tavleen Singh regretted how false secularism practiced by some political parties like the Congress and the Samajwadi Party, lulled Indian media into indifference vis-a-vis the cruelty to the Kashmiri Hindus; they tend to perpetuate the blinkered, one-sided view that the Muslim community is the only victim of communal violence. Judging from the Congress party's vote-bank politics, one has no doubt that this party is the foremost culprit in promoting the sense of victimhood in the Muslims, instead of bridging the divide between the two largest communities-the Hindus and the Muslims in the country, since independence.

Hinduism is the most tolerant and broadminded faith with ancient traditional values of respect for all faiths. Hence, the Constitution-makers did not think it necessary to specifically mention secularism in its Directive Principles. It was only during the Emergency, the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, with dictatorial powers, added "secularism" to the Constitution through an amendment. But, unfortunately, this psuedo-secularism has become the bane of communal harmony.       

Aam Aadmi Party phenomenon

Aam Aadmi Party led by Arvind Kejriwal, a former Indian Revenue Service officer, is making waves on the Delhi political scene following its unexpectedly impressive performance in the recent State Assembly elections held on December 4, 2013. It emerged as the second largest political party with 28 seats behind the BJP with 32 seats in the Assembly's total strength of 70 members. The ruling Congress party headed by the outgoing Chief Minister Mrs Sheila Dikshit was reduced to mere 8 seats. She herself was defeated by Kejriwal in her New Delhi seat.

The main cause of the Dikshit govt's humiliating defeat seemed to be her complacent arrogance. In her 15 year rule, she had improved the Capital city's infrastructure, but the problems of skyrocketing prices of essential commodities, including onions, tomatoes, potatoes, etc., worsened. She was unable to do anything to control them. Problems of sewage, inner city roads, sanitation, remained unsolved. Also, the general image of the central govt, headed by the Congress party as the most corrupt, non-performing, dynastic outfit, had also a serious impact on the Sheila Dikshit govt. There was a widespread mood of anger against the Congress in the voters. This benefitted the main opposition party, the Bharatiya Janata Party(BJP) and the new one-year old party the Aam Admi Party(AAP).

Since no party got the absolute majority of minimum 36 seats, there was a stalemate in the beginning as the largest party, the BJP declined the Lt-Governor's invitaion to form the govt on the plea that it did not have the numbers to form a stable govt. AAP had publicly declared that it will neither support any party nor seek support from any party-namely, the BJP or the Congress. However, the humiliated Congress party in order to keep its main opponent, the BJP,  out of power, voluntarily declared an un-conditional support to the AAP to form the govt. Arvind Kejriwal, the AAP leader, abandoning all its earlier high-sounding promises that it would neither seek any party's support nor support any party to form the govt., conveniently compromised to come to power. It used the pretext that its self-arranged referendum through SMS, mobile phones, and locality meetings, etc., gave them people's majority approval in favour of forming the govt. The electoral mandate and its earlier high moral claims were thrown to the winds to occupy power.

Similarly, other promises like free water and cheap electricity for every one were quickly announced as a populist sop, but economic experts denounced both these measures as flawed and financially disastrous. No much prior study and their implications seemed to have been gone into. As regards their much-acclaimed aversion to the VIP culture, Arvind Kejriwal and his ministers were found to be hypocritical and duplicitous. The Ministers preferred expensive big limousines like Toyota Innovas for their travels; Kejriwal approved a big official accommodation spread over 9000 sq.ft with ten rooms and a big lawn. He justified it and got his parents' approval to move in. No wonder, his supporters and friends were annoyed at Kejriwal's disconnect between his own words and deeds, and protested to him. He quickly decided to control the damage, reversed his decision, asking for a smaller house. All his decisions seem to have one thing in common: Kejriwal's incapability to adhere to his high moral positions; and a tendency to compromise under the pretext of popular wishes gathered through a self-serving and dubious methods. 

Indian diplomat Devyani Khobragade's humiliation in New York

The Devyani Khobragade episode has revealed some disturbing facts:One, the socalled "strategic partnership" between the US and India has been found to be hollow, with a lot of gas but no substance. When it comes the crunch, the US govt as well as its Indian-American citizens act as arrogant, crude adversaries. If Indo-US strategic partnership was based on any genuine friendship, mutual respect, equality and sensitivity, how could a minor incident of an alleged "visa fraud" on the part of an Indian deputy consul-general in New York happen in the way it did? It is unthinkable that a diplomat of a friendly country would be subjected to a worst kind of public humiliation:arresting, handcuffing and strip-searching as a common criminal when she went to drop her two girls to school in the morning. Does this not show the US authorities' utter disregard for even basic courtesies and decencies provided under the Vienna Conventions?

Let us face the bitter truth:our government's soft and weak-kneed  policies to the US-as also other nations-have brought such humiliations on our citizens. The US administration dare not do this China or to Russia. It is reported that when the Russian ambassador's car was towed away in Washington DC, the next day, six American embassy cars in Moscow were picked up. Even Brazil cancelled its President's official trip to the US when Snowden's account of the US spying on it was revealed; it also revoked 4billion dollar military deal with the US. This is how self-respecting assert themselves.