Sonia Gandhi in combative mood

At a time when political atmosphere is already tense and volatile owing to the ruling Congress party's acts of omission and commission on the Lokpal bill and other issues, Mrs Sonia Gandhi, the president of the Congress and the chairperson of the UPA, after months of silence, has suddenly emerged into a fiercely combative role. She has urged her party MPs to be ready "to fight" the opposition and Team Anna. Thus, the fears of some observers that frequent confrontations between the two sides is essentially the result of the aggressive and non-conciliatory mood of the dynasty-the mother and son duo. As a foreign-born bahu of a combative mother-in-law, with little grounding in Indian ethos and values of consensus and respect for others' views, she is unable to see grave risks involved in such aggressive posture. By ignoring wide-spread public sentiments for a strong Lokpal with its investigating responsibilities transferred from the CBI, the ruling Congress seems to have paved the way for inevitable confrontation with the opposition and Team Anna movement. It has to be seen how the potential conflict will be sorted out, given the half-heartedness and arrogance of the Congress leadership.

Sonia Gandhi's low-witted son, pursuing his own combative style, has already drawn up serious battle-lines in his hyped electoral campaign in UP on the eve of the Assembly elections. In view of the prolonged infighting in the state unit, opinion polls independently undertaken by some media houses recently, do not predict any dramatic improvement in the Congress party's electoral prospects. The forecasts are for a fragmented/fractured verdict with the Congress in 3rd/fourth position, SP and BSP taking the first two positions. During his shrill campaign, Rahul Gandhi has been accusing his opponents of casteism and communalism; but, unfortunately, his own record is not very clean. In an incredible, mysterious act, he revealed that Sam Pitroda, an NRI entrepreneur settled in the US whom his father Rajiv Gandhi had invited to help in mobile phone revolution, was a low caste carpenter. Why Rahul did this to disgrace an Indian innovator who was helping his mother country selflessly? What was he trying to achieve or prove that the Congress was low-caste friendly? Was itn't a most silly, thoughtless and insenstive exercise? Does it behove a potential Prime Minister? Such lack of wisdom and sobriety is aggravating the tensions in the polity because of the small-mindedness and myopia of some ruling party leaders.      

Harvard University's action against Swamy for his article on Islamic terrorism

After the controversy that has followed the decision of the Harvard University to abruptly terminate a few Summer Courses that Dr Subramanian Swamy was conducting at the campus as a visiting professor, I re-read his article in the Mumbai journal-DNA, dated July 16, 2011, captioned:"Analysis:How to wipe out Islamic terrorism", that has triggered the adverse action against him. Written within three days of the terrorist blast in Mumbai on July 13, 2011, Swamy's article seemed to have been driven by emotional reaction to the terrible terror act. One may differ with some extreme solutions the author has suggested to fight the menace of Islamic terrorism which, undoubtedly, posed a grave threat to India-its social, communal harmony and stability. It is true that the kind of strong, wide-spread condemnation should have emanated from the Muslim community is hardly visible. On the top of it, one hears voices in favour of Sharia, separate personal laws, firm opposition to Uniform Civil Code provided in the Constitution and repeatedly underlined by the Supreme Court; also, wide support for burqa, special quotas in jobs, education as well as financial packages as if backwardness and poverty is only confined to the minority community! All these factors are creating a pre-partition environment of special pampering and favouritism that ultimately resulted in the division of the country.

In this disturbing background and given the goals of Islamic fanatics to which Dr Swamy has referred in his article, the emerging scenario does seem alarming and not so innocuous. Hence, it would be suicidal to ignore Islamic terrorism, aided and abetted by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, al-Qaeda and other sundry radical outfits. The USA is itself a major victim of this menace. Hence, it appears that the Harvard University has over-reacted to Dr Swamy's unpalatable, blunt views, not politically correct and traditionally liberal. At any rate, his Summer Courses were limited to economics; they did not relate to Islamic terrorism, radicalism in Muslim societies or any analysis of Islam. Thus, shutting him out of Harvard on his non-economic opinions, hardly does any credit to the prestigious University's respect for the right of the freedom of expression. It is terribly saddening.         

J&K Chief Minister Omar Abdullah's advice on China's unfriendly posture

The Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah, speaking in Mumbai at the Indian Express discussion programme-Adda-on December 4, was frank and forthright in his advice to his national ally, the ruling Congress party, to show " more spine when dealing with China". Under Jawaharlal Nehru's leadership
as our first Prime Minister after independence, we were the first to champion China's cause at the UN and the world at large. Even ignoring India's own interests to become a permanent member of the Security Council. But, unfortunately, within a few years of Communist China's emergence as an independent entity under Mao Tse-tung, its policy of double-speak and duplicity towards India began. But, as usual, we were too goody-goody and stupid to see its real motives. India-China Bhai Bhai slogan adopted by us never became bilateral; it was one-sided. Despite Sardar Patel's warning to Prime Minister Nehru, in a letter, shortly before his death, to be vigilant about China and not take its words at their face value, we did not prepare ourselves for any eventuality at the hands of an aggressive neighbour with expansionist designs. We paid a heavy price and suffered a humiliating defeat when Mao's hordes invaded the North-East(Arunachal Pradesh-then called NEFA), in the early winter of 1962.

Although some lessons were learnt, but essentially we seem to be frightened of our big neighbour. It keeps pushing us, humiliating us with occasional pin-pricks about territorial claims on Arunachal Pradesh and other areas and dictating to us on the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan refugees in India. Recently, when the World Buddhist Conference took place in Delhi, even a junior diplomat-a vice consul in Kolkata, had the audacity to tell the government that the State Governor or the Chief Minister must not attend a function to honour the Dalai Lama. Fortunately, he was ignored. But the basic fact of our softness and reluctance to tick off China remains that has resulted in our hostile neighbour taking us for granted. They regard J&K as disputed in order to support their friend of all seasons-Pakistan.

Hence, in this backdrop of pusillanimity and timidity vis-a-vis China, we needed a young man in authority like the Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir, Omar Abdullah to tell his senior ally at the Centre, the ruling Congress, to display "more spine when dealing with China". He rightly added that if we are expected to follow a one-China policy and not question Taiwan's and Tibet's status, shouldn't China reciprocate and follow "one India policy for India" and not calling "Kashmir disputed"? In other words, he urged the policy of tit for tat, to tell China that we cannot take her aggressive and provocative statements and posture lying down.   

Muslim quota

As elections to five State Assemblies are nearing, the despicable vote bank politicians from the Congress, the Mulayam Singh's SP and Mayawati's BSP, alongwith communal bigots in academia and intellectual class, are vying with each other to shamelessly play the Muslim quota card. The issue is being hotly debated in the media, particularly TV news channels. In one such discussion on December 1 night, one was struck by an unexpected parochial mindset of one leading panelist, the vice-chancellor of the Jamia Milia university who was unabashedly batting for Muslim quota. Fortunately, another Muslim panelist and a Muslim student in the audience, challenged the vice-chancellor as to why reservations should be done on religious and not economic basis?

Why this self-serving perception is being deliberately perpetuated that Indian Muslims are the most backward and impoverished lot? Why are we refusing to look at the misery and deprivation of other groups? What have Muslim leaders and other well-off members of the community have done to extricate their community from self-imposed obscurantist ways and madarsa teaching? Who is responsible for keeping Muslim women backward, homebound and in purdah(burqa)? Is the quota demand not dangerously divisive and disharmonious?