Second anniversary of UPA-2

The ruling Congress recently celebrated the second anniversary of the UPA's second term with a dinner hosted by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. It was a low key affair. The major southern ally-the DMK, that is upset with the senior partner because of the arrest and detention in the Tihar jail of Kanimozhi, the daughter of its leader M.Karunanidhi, on the corruption charges registered by the CBI, was represented at the dinner party by a single leader. There was hardly any public participation or enthusiasm on display for the occasion. Thus, the people's mood seemed glum due to excessive rise of prices of essential commodities. The price of petrol with the latest hike of Rs.5, crossed Rs 63/- per litre in Delhi and was close to Rs.70/- in other metros. The excuse advanced by the ruling party spokesmen was that they could do nothing to intervene as market forces determined the price. When critics and opponents of the petrol hike reminded  Finance Minister  Pranab Mukherjee and others that how come the increase talked about much earlier was delayed for several weeks due to State elections to avoid voter backlash, they had no answer.

As if the series of scams, including 2G spectrum allocation and Commonwealth Games, and terrible, uncontrolled inflation, were not enough to distress and disillusion the common people, the ruling party unleashed several legislative proposals in the fields of food security for BPL and "average" families, land acquisition, communal violence, etc. Although these were supposed to deal with serious problems to help common people, they were found to be controversial and counter-productive, with potential for more harm than good. All of these proposals were drafted by Mrs Sonia Gandhi's favourite National Advisory Council(NAC), a virtual parallel centre of decision-making headed by Mrs Gandhi herself which is not accountable to the Parliament or any other official agency.

On the top of that irresponsibility and insensitivity is the loose cannon and foot-in-the mouth tendency of some Cabinet Ministers and senior general secretaries of the party. We recently witnessed Rahul Gandhi and Digvijay Singh's verbal excesses relating to alleged massacre of farmers of the Greater NOIDA villages of Bhatta-Parsaul and the alleged rape of women without any reliable evidence. Singh was earlier guilty of anti-national comments in support of Batla House terrorists. And the latest case of utter impropriety and stupidity is the fulmination of  Union Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh against the IIT/IIM faculties, calling them almost sub-standard, totally ignoring the fact that these national institutes have made a name for themselves and India worldwide due to the high quality of their alumni. How can "world class students" be produced by a less than world class faculty? Does it make sense? With such Ministers in the Indian govt., do we need any external enemies to malign the country?    

Mamata takes charge

A new chapter has begun in West Bengal with Mamata Bannerjee taking over as the first woman Chief Minister of the State. It was a remarkable achievement on her part to single-handedly topple a powerful leftist regime that was in office for 34 long years. The change in West Bengal was long overdue and Ms Bannerjee became the catalyst for it. However, her real test begins now. It is easy to sway the electorate which is already fed up with an incumbent regime that ruled over them for over three decades, with emotional issues at a given time. One has to wait and watch whether she delivers what she has promised, sooner than later. Good governance is a long and painstaking effort.

There is no dearth of sceptics and cynics who keep reminding us about Ms Bannerjee's unimpressive record as Union Railway Minister. On the top of it, she is known as mercurial and maverick with her own eccentricities. Once in power as Chief Minister of a volatile and sophisticated people, she has to lead with sagacity, finesse and patience, taking every one along.

Her Finance Minister Dr Amit Mitra, the erstwhile FICCI honcho, who starts his political career with a lot of media goodwill, however, disappointed me somewhat in his maiden TV interview on Headlines Today, May 20 night, He sounded too much of a faithful-more on the lines of a religious convert who chants "Allah, Allah, more than necessary, defending his leader Mamata Bannerjee whom he mysteriously insisted on repeatedly calling as "Mamata Bandhopadhya"(perhaps a more puritanical Bengali surname and not the Anglicised one); one has not heard her ever use "Bandhopadhya" as her surname. Ms Bannerjee struck her own discordant note at her first press conference as Chief Minister when she enthusiastically embraced the Congress minoritism plank as one of her foremost priorities. It seemed like Prime Minister Manmohan Singh's "Muslim first" slogan following the Sachar committee's recommendations. 

Karnataka Governor Bhardwaj's motivated move

It is a painful fact of Indian political life that more often than not, political appointees to important constitutional posts act more as agents or loyal workers of the ruling party at the Centre to promote its agenda, rather than serving as impartial, objective functionaries within the clearly defined parameters of the Constitution and the apex court's relevant judgements. Frankly speaking, the Indian National Congress that has ruled at the Centre close to nearly five decades since independence, shares the major part of the guilt in this respect.

For almost first twenty years during the prime ministership of Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and then Mr Lal Bahadur Shastri who was unfortunately in office briefly, these constitutional appointments were generally made fairly, keeping high moral values and merit in mind. The decline and degeneration started  with Mrs Indira Gandhi when the emphasis suddenly was on committed bureaucracy and judiciary. The Emergency excesses did not spare even highly respected bureaucrats like Mr PN Haksar, the then Principal Secretary of the Prime Minister,  because he was perceived to be independent-minded and unhappy with Sanjay Gandhi's ruthless shenanigans. Mr Haksar's in-laws' well-known shop in the Connaught Place was raided to give him a signal "to behave". Arbitrary judicial appointments and promotions of "committed" judges during the dark era of 19 months are common knowledge.

The appointment of Governors like Mr HR Bhardwaj is the product of that reprehensible and politically motivated mindset. For them, loyalty to the ruling dynasty is supreme; if, in the process, constitutional proprieties are thrown to the winds, so be it. Mr Bhardwaj did enough damage to the reputation of the UPA government when he was the Union Law Minister. Finally, he had to be eased out of his post but, instead of sending him home, he was kicked up to the Governor's office, that too in the southern State of Karnataka where the opposition party, the BJP, had trounced his party to form its first State govt. Obviously, to keep his party bosses in Delhi happy, he was needling the BJP govt from the very outset. The recent Supreme Court judgement reinstating the disqualified BJP MLAs who had openly rebelled against the party govt thus inviting the wrath of the anti-defection law, gave Governor Bhardwaj his excuse to recommend the Yeddyurappa govt.'s dismissal and imposing the President's rule-in effect, his rule. Unfortunately for Mr Bhardwaj, however, in the face of strong BJP reaction in Delhi, better sense seems to have  prevailed at the Centre: the Governor's recommendation was rejected. There is speculation in the media that dejected and humiliated Mr Bhardwaj may choose to resign.  

What can India do to help Pakistan in its crisis?

At a time when Pakistan is in turmoil, assailed by outraged Pakistanis' angry questioning,  following the stealth operation by its strategic, long-time ally, the US, to kill the 9/11 terrorist mastermind, Osama bin Laden, in a hideout in the Pakistani garrison town of Abbottabad, in an alleged violation of its sovereignty and territory, some pro-Pak Indian voices have come out in open. Known Pak apologists like Mani Shankar Aiyar-a compulsive one-have appeared in electronic and print media to plead for Pakistan. We must show our sympathy and hold Pakistan's hand in their hour of crisis, they insist. It is in our interest to make Pakistan a better place to live in, it is argued.

It is not clear what exactly these Pak lobbyists want India to do. How can an outsider, though a neighbour, make it a more enlightened, humane and tolerant society, at peace with itself and its neighbours? Isn't it a job that only its civil society can do? This is regardless of our past experience when such gestures and moves were spurned. For Pakistan, we are essentially an enemy country. Pakistani advocates like Aiyar presumably want us to forget all the crimes that the Pakistani establishment and the ISI have done to India, including illegal infiltration, cross-border terrorism, 26/11 mayhem, sleeping modules they have set up all over India, and tremendous loss of innocent lives. The resultant pain is unimaginable and colossal. Have they extradited even one Indian fugitive criminal like Dawood Ibrahim who has been given sanctuary in Pakistan? On the contrary, they are denying that Dawood is in Pakistan. Were they not similarly denying the presence of Osama in Pakistan? Have they dismantled even one terrorist training camp aimed at India, as a friendly gesture?

There is almost a one-way traffic of Pakistani artists and writers to India, some of whom make millions and go back. Some even stay and work in Bollywood. Is there any evidence of reciprocity? Are the Pakistani authorities, the army and other powerful elements really interested in genuine friendship and neighbourly relations? Any mention that basically we Indians and Pakistanis are the same people, have the same race, music, language, cuisine, etc., is generally frowned upon as a ploy to destroy their separate identity and nationhood! It seems a psychological problem-a sense of insecurity. We genuinely wish them well; we want them to prosper in peace and modernity, away from Islamic orthodoxy and bigotry. In effect, we are natural friends.

Will Osama's elimination help modernise Islam?

Thursday, 5 May 2011

A liberal Indian Muslim commentator, Mr Javed Anand, writing in the Indian Express(May 4), in the aftermath of the US special forces' meticulously planned assault on Osama bin Laden's hideout in Pakistan's military town Abbottabad, gunning down the terrorist mastermind, seems highly optimistic about his faith in the post-Osama era. One would be happy to share Mr Anand's optimism if there were overwhelming signs of the decline and defeat of Islamic bigotry and radicalism. However, when one looks around, not only in South Asia but also in West Asia, Britain, France, etc., supporters of Wahabism, Salafism, other sectarian schools, Sharia law, seem on the rise.

In the first report on  the spread of Islamic radicalism in the British campuses, an all-party Parliamentary Group urged the govt. to "act fast and tough" as "such extremism endangers our security at home..." The British media also carried Wikileaks documents, revealing that "at least 35 terrorists held at Gauntanamo Bay were indocrinated by extremists in UK". At home, we have the example of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board leaders complaining against the govt and the judiciary allegedly acting contrary to the Sharia. They tend to forget that they are citizens of a democracy and not an Islamic republic governed by Sharia; here, the Indian Constitution and the Indian Penal Code are supreme.

Mr Javed Anand is right when he talks of democracy prevailing in a few Arab countries recently, namely, Tunisia and  Egypt. Even there the situation is still not absolutely reassuring. One wishes them good luck; even to the peoples of Libya, Syria, Yemen, etc. But, unfortunately, the basic problem is that as long as the Holy Book contains violent and intolerant references to "disbelievers"(infidels), who are destined to burn in hell-fire, the radical Islam can hardly change to a soft, tolerant and modern faith. Listen to supposedly highly educated medical doctor-turned TV evangelist, Dr Zakir Naik. He pours scorn on non-momins, although indirectly. His disapproval of mixed marriages, between Muslims and non-Muslims is so bizarre that I still can't forget the similies he used to ridicule them. Calling them unIslamic, he said that while the momin partner will go to heaven after death, the non-momin will suffer in hell.

As I said in my opening paragraph, I would be immensely delighted if Islam turns a modern page, emerging from its 7th century mindset.

Killing of Osama

The elimination of Osama bin Laden in a meticulously planned operation on late Sunday night, May 1,  in a Pakistani garrison town of Abbotabad, by special forces, is a feather in the cap of the US armed forces and their suspreme commander US President Barack Obama. Its timing may have a political dimension for the US President whose popularity rating was going down, endangering his prospects for a 2nd term. The dramatic success of  the US "Navy Seals" commandoes in killing the ruthless preacher of the perverse of ideology of hate-Osama bin Laden-is bound to boost Obama's electoral chances manifold.
The attack on the Osama hideout also exposes, once again, the duplicity  of the Pakistani intelligence agency ISI, and the Army. Is it possible that their most valued guest was living in a hugely walled, secure accommodation in their army town with his big family and other protectors, and the ISI and the army chief Gen. Kayani did not know about it? Thus, the Pakistanis were supposed to be the US' trusted and strategic allies in war against terrorism,  but they always played fast and loose:Once in a while, they would arrest some minor al-Qaeda players and hand them over to the US authorities against huge sums of military and econom ic aid. But insincerity and double-facedness was writ large on Pakistan's policy on terrorism. For their own compulsions, they seemed to shelter Osama. India remains their main target. The question is that having achieved their decade-old mission of physically liquidating  the architect of 9/11 massacre, will the US pack their bags and go home from Afghanistan for the radical Islamic elements like the Taliban and the Lashkare Toiba to mobilise their suicide squads to avenge the killing of Osama? Will the US finally recognise the real face of Pakistan  and its being the foremost exporter of terrorism in the world? A question is also being asked whether India as a foremost victim of Pakistani terrorism will do to POK-the centre of terrorist training camps aimed at India, what the US did to eliminate Osama-a terrible source of threat to its national security? Frankly speaking, it is an unreal question. We are known to be a soft state with weak and confused leadership. Our Prime Minister is strangely obsessed with peace talks with Pakistan regardless of the pain and hurt the latter causes us. In 64 years of our independence, we have never done this to safeguard our national interests. In 1971 Bangladesh war, we were literally forced into it. Even then, we did not press the advantage of our victory and 90,000 Pak POWs in our hands. We again trusted  ZA Bhutto and let the Pakistani POWs go. We were back to square one, as usual!

Lokpal Bill: NAC Vs Joint Committee

Mrs Sonia Gandhi's-headed National Advisory Council is regarded by its critics as the UPA's super cabinet that tries to determine its policy directions. Thus, it underlines two separate power centres. An Indian Express report (April 29) captioned: "NAC unveils a sweeping anti-corruption strategy", only confirms the critics' charge.

After the setting up of a joint committee of the UPA govt and Anna Hazare's civil society representatives, the Union Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee who is chairman of the joint committee, assured the nation that the proposed Lokpal bill would be drafted with sincerity and alacrity to make it strong and elaborate. Mrs Sonia Gandhi, who chairs the UPA and the NAC, had declared that since the joint committee has undertaken the task of drafting the anti-corruption bill, the NAC would do nothing in this regard. Hence, the Indian Express report came like a bolt from the blue. If the NAC, according to its boss, Mrs Gandhi, was supposed to do nothing on the Lokpal bill, why this sudden announcement "unveiling a blueprint of a more comprehensive anti-corruption strategy?" Is some one playing a double game? Will Mrs Sonia Gandhi as the chairperson of both-the UPA and the NAC, clarify to the Indian people as to what was happening? Why this pre-emptive and duplicate effort of an anti-corruption road-map by the NAC that amounts to sabotaging the task of the joint committee comprising govt and civil society representatives? Does the NAC not trust Mr Pranab Mukherjee's committee?