Showing posts with label Narinder Modi. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Narinder Modi. Show all posts

Monday, January 20, 2014

SUNDAY SENTIMENT Politics is the Art & Craft of Befooling People


It is politicians themselves alone who have defiled the precept and practice of politics. It is they who have degraded those who are in power today or can be tomorrow.  That is why politics is now being recognized as the art of befooling people. It is called the game scoundrels play. A writer defined politics as "the art of getting votes from the poor and money from the rich on the pretext of protecting each from the other".

Numerous instances can be quoted to support the above description of politics. There is no gainsaying the fact that politicians in India take the people as fools who, like herds of cattle, can be shouted away to any direction they like.  It is generally believed, more so by politicians, that people, nay voters, have a short memory and, therefore, easy and useful to cheat the people for their political and electoral purposes with their glib talk. This has paid dividends to politicians many a time.

But equally wrong is to think that people are fools or they can be befooled at all the occasions for all the time.

Latest in the Congress party's decision not to name its prime ministerial candidate for the coming 2014 parliament elections.  It is the unchallenged privilege of a political party to fight an election or not. Equally is it its right to project its chief ministerial or prime ministerial candidate.

We follow the Westminster form of parliamentary democracy and many of the traditions followed in Great Britain. It has practically a two-party system. Therefore, the person under whose leadership the elections are held is the natural choice for prime ministership. In the alternative, the incumbent prime minister is the person who seeks a fresh mandate for his party.

Only those parties in opposition which do not contest all the seats in parliament do not — and need not — project their prime ministerial candidates because doing so amounts to becoming a laughing stock of the people. If a party that is not contesting that number of seats which can give it a majority and still announces its prime ministerial candidate, it is just kidding itself and the electorate?

In the present context, Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh has already declared that he will hang his boots after the next election. That means that if Congress-led UPA is returned to power once again, it has to have a person under whom the elections are held and who will be the prime minister if it wins at the hustings. Whenever the Congress went in for elections whether under Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru or Mrs. Indira Gandhi, there was never a doubt in the mind of the party and the people as to who will be the prime minister if the party wins majority. It was never in doubt even when party contested 1984, 1989 or 1991 polls for Parliament under Rajiv Gandhi. It was a different matter when Rajiv Gandhi was killed during election campaign in 1991 elections and Narasimha Rao had to take his place.

The 1996 and 2004 elections to parliament were held under Mrs. Sonia Gandhi's leadership with the electorate never in doubt that if Party wins she and she alone will be the prime minister. It remains a mystery that Mrs. Gandhi who went to meet the President with a claim to majority support in Parlament and to seek an invitation to form a government,  on return surprised everybody saying that she will not be the prime minister and instead nominated Dr. Manmohan Singh.

At the moment there was no shortage of top leadership demanding in a chorus that Rahul should be elevated as prime minister. Some wanted it right now. Even before and after the elections to five State assemblies in December 2013 Rahul Gandhi  being thrown up as the Congress Party's PM candidate were doing the rounds in media and political circles. Endorsing Rahul Gandhi, Dr. Singh on January 3 said that Rahul is an able person with all the "outstanding credentials" needed to be a prime minister.  Finance Minister P. Chidambaram on December 31 wanted Congress to name its prime ministerial candidate.

In an interview to the Hindi daily Bhaskar Rahul himself said, "In the national interest, it is necessary that Congress forms the government at the Centre; and in this direction whatever responsibilities the organisation has given me, I will discharge them with utmost sincerity and honesty." There was a media hype that on January 17 during the AICC meeting Rahul will be nominated the prime ministerial candidate. But Mrs. Sonia Gandhi put her foot down that Rahul will not be projected as party's prime ministerial candidate. Even when there were shouts in his favour, she remained unmoved.

It is a clever move on the part of Mrs. Sonia Gandhi. Rahul has been made the chief of the party election campaign committee. In this way both Mrs. Soniga and Rahul wish to eat the cake and have it too. In case the party wins, Rahul will hog all the limelight and emerge the 'natural' candidate for prime ministership. In case it is otherwise, Congress will claim that Rahul was not in the race. If he is made the prime ministerial hopeful and loses, it would amount to sealing Rahul's fate for ever.  This is what Mrs. Gandhi has strategized.

In this connection, BJP prime ministerial candidate, Mr. Narinder Modi's comment is apt: "When defeat is imminent, which mother will sacrifice her son politically. The heart of a mother decided to protect her son".  Congress took no chances; it did not gamble.

But Rahul had different explanation. He enlightened people that it is not the party but the Party MPs who elect a prime minister.   Convinced?                                                      ***

Monday, October 28, 2013



BJP National General Secretary Murlidhar Rao was born in a farmer's family in Andhra. A product of the Osmania University Hyderabad from where he did his M.Phil (Political Psychology), he was also elected General Secretary of University Students Union there. He joined  BJP only in 2009 where had a meteroric rise. Initially attached to the National President Shri Rajnath Singh, in 2010 he was made a national secretary in-charge of Tamilnadu and Kerala. In 2013 he was elevated as national general secretary. He got his initiation into the RSS at a very young age and later joined the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad. Led by  late Shri Dattopant Thengadi he was one of those instrumental in the formation of Swadeshi Jagran Manch and became its All-India Organising Secretary. He did a lot in taking up the causes of kisan panchayats, beedi workers, farmers, fishermen, beedi mazdoors and weavers in different States of the country.  Amba Charan Vashishth interviewed Shri Rao at his residence in Delhi last week. Excerpts:

Now that BJP has finally made its choice for Prime Minister in Shri Narender Modi, how do you visualize the latest political scenario in the country?
Doubts, if any, in the mind of anyone outside BJP about the mass appeal of Shri Narendra Modi throughout the nation are fast evaporating, particularly after unprecedented success of his visits to different parts of the country. His anointment as BJP’s PM candidate has geared up the cadres, rejuvenated our sympathisers and also converted undecided voters into our supporters.
The country as a whole wants this most, corrupt, inefficient and shameless UPA government to go. BJP under the leadership of Shri Narendra Modi will prove to be the game changer. People clearly seem to have made that choice open. This is because the people have seen the performance based track record of Gujarat under Shri Narendra Modi’s leadership.

You come from Andhra Pradesh. Do you think it will have an impact in your State too?
Certainly. The response of AP is also in tune with that of the rest of the country. Congress has messed up in AP. The people feel let down on every front. This impression emerged from the success of the Hyderabad youth rally of Shri  Narendra Modi. The people of Andhra are clear about the opportunistic and flip-flop policy of Congress on Telangana. They have messed up the issue for political gains risking lives of thousands and putting two sides into a conflict. Local leadership of the Congress is a divided house fighting each other. BJP is surely going to gain in the state because of negative sentiment against Congress and a positive feeling for performance of various BJP ruled states and more particularly Gujarat under Shri Narendra Modi’s leadership.

About four years back Home Minister P. Chidambaram announced UPA's decision to carve out a new State of Telangana, but later resiled. This time it was the AICC which took a decision on Telengana. But for the last over two months nothing seems to have moved in the UPA. What is your assessment of the situation?
Congress has bungled on the issue of Telangana. It is the result of their insincerity and dishonesty to the cause. Congress has not done proper homework and preparation before announcing the bifurcation decision. They are trying to appease people without actually delivering on their promises. With every passing day it is becoming clear that Congress is cheating the people of both the regions of Telangana and Seemandhra. They will have to pay a heavy price for the same.

You represent the youth in the Party. Will Shri Modi's anointment have an impact on the young voters?
India is a young nation or the nation of the Youth. The young generation has become very conscious of their rights and is assertively articulating their aspirations. With the level of exposure and information available, the youth are capable of making comparisons . Shri Narendra Modi has caught the imagination of the youth with his vision and proven performance not only in Gujarat but all over the country by ably and openly talking about his idea of Future India. He has focused on transforming governance to achieve the set national goals – particularly those related to development - in time bound manner.  The youth of the country are now impatient for change and increasingly finding themselves nearer to BJP under Shri Narendra Modi’s leadership than ever before.

BJP's opponents had been making a fun of the NDA's hope to form a government at the Centre in 2014 in view of the fact that BJP has almost zero representation in 200 odd Parliamentary seats in the South, West Bengal and North-Eastern States. What would you say?
As I said earlier also, the people across the country are fed up with the corrupt and inefficient UPA rule. The states you are mentioning are no different. In this situation I see substantial gains for BJP in these areas also. More important is the fact that public opinion against Congress is building up day by day in every part of the country and BJP-led NDA is emerging as the only alternative. Therefore political formations involving the non-Congress parties and BJP are very much visible.

As part of its efforts to check the fiscal deficit, UPA government has put a ban on fresh appointments and announced other measures. How do you feel about these?
UPA has not been able to deal with the problems faced by the economy in an innovative way. They are unable to think of any idea to take the country out of the situation they have pushed it into. To reduce deficits, steps like cutting down avoidable imports like telecom and power equipments, edible oils etc. and pushing domestic manufacturing so as to escalate exports etc. should have been initiated on an immediate basis. The government prefers to bring foreign investment instead of all such measures. But just by removing the caps on foreign investment, foreign players are going to trust more a non-performing government and invest in a significant way.

Can you explain the reasons for a poor showing of BJP at the hustings in the South?
In Karnataka during the recent assembly elections we could not do the needed political consolidation based on the good governance of our government. But we are now back to expanding our base and this time we will surely convert the growing enthusiasm and support for BJP into winning seats. The people of Karnataka will soon realize the need of bringing back BJP to power in the state. In Tamil Nadu, the response to Shri L K Advani ji’s  yatra to raise the issue of black money was huge. Also the recent killings of BJP leaders by Jihadi forces have also generated sympathy towards BJP and people are rallying around the idea of a non-Congress government at the centre. The Narendra Modi factor will also benefit BJP significantly. Surveys also demonstrate that there is an enormous response in favour of BJP. In Andhra Pradesh, people are fed up with the state Congress government and will respond very strongly against the flip-flop, opportunistic  policy of UPA government on Telangana. Realignment of political forces seems imminent.

You have been a leading light of the Swadeshi movement for pretty long. How far do you think the NDA's economic policies will be singed with the thinking of your movement?
BJP is an ideology based party committed to self-reliance.  By and large, it has believed and tried to follow the Swadeshi Model of economics. Even during NDA regime we saw it in Doha when Murasoli Maran took a strong stand. I am pretty confident that in future also the ideals of self-reliance will dominate economic thinking of BJP & NDA.

Can you enlighten what steps BJP is going to take to make those sections and areas of the people to vote for you in the next election which had not done earlier?
We are taking a lot of steps to remain in constant touch with all sections of the people and align ourselves with their hopes and aspirations. We have very actively conducted our campaigns to represent the genuine aspirations and needs of the people like women, youth, SC, ST, weavers, fishermen and minorities. We will be focusing through various campaigns on the first time voters. We are working hard to make the different sections of people to understand that BJP is the only party to espouse their feelings and address their concerns.

Would you like to comment on what happened in Muzaffarnagar in UP recently?
Muzzafarnagar riots are yet another example of use of divisive politics for narrow political ends. It is a complete failure of the Samajvadi Party government of Akhilesh Yadav. Congress led UPA at the Centre following the agenda of vote bank politics has not given importance to addressing the riots and instead targeted BJP leaders for narrow political gains. Even during the recent incidents on our border inflicted by Pakistan, Congress preferred to target BJP which is their political adversary instead of the national adversary.

Many important Congress leaders were challenging BJP to name its prime ministerial candidate in the past. But now that BJP has done, Congress is still not coming out with the name of its own prime ministerial candidate. How do you look at the situation?

Now that the BJP has decided its leader, Congress lacks the confidence in deciding its leader as they do not have any capable leader to show up to people as their face for 2014 elections. Rahul Gandhi as a leader has failed in Amethi, then in UP and also in the Parliament.                                                                                                                                  ***

Sunday, October 27, 2013

THE SUNDAY SENTIMENT October 27, 2013 Congress over-sensitive

THE SUNDAY SENTIMENT                                                 October 27, 2013

Congress over-sensitive
How is shahzaada "undignified"?

 Congress has taken exception to BJP's Prime Ministerial candidate and Gujarat Chief Minister Narinder Modi using the word "shahzaada" to refer to its Vice-President Mr. Rahul Gandhi.  Calling upon him (Mr. Modi) to desist from using "undignified" language, Congress spokesperson Janardhan Dwivedi said their vice-president should be addressed in the same manner in which he addresses people.
The Congress reaction, on the face of it, displays over-sensitivity on the part of the party.  The word "shahzaada" can, by no standards, be called or considered "undignified".  On the use of word "shahzaada" Congress is fuming — and threatening Mr. Modi — the same Mr. Modi whom Mrs. Sonia Gandhi had no regrets to call "maut ka saudaagar". Shahzaada is an Urdu word meaning a "prince" which cannot be taken as "undignified".
It is true that the word "prince" or shahzaada is an antithesis to democracy. It revives in us the memories of a bygone era of monarchic governance. Yet, at the same time, we cannot deny the fact that since the times of late Mrs. Indira Gandhi in early seventies, even in Indian democracy the ruling Congress Party stands reduced to a dynastic entity where the crown prince is the apparent heir to the throne on relinquishing or death of the head of the ruling family. This transformation of Congress party into a dynastic organism has resulted in Indian democracy, in effective, turning into a dynastic democracy as for as the ruling party is concerned. First, Mrs. Gandhi groomed late Sanjay Gandhi and after his unfortunate death, made the reluctant Indian Airlines pilot, her elder son, Rajiv Gandhi as the heir apparent. This became a reality following her unfortunate assassination and the crown prince was elevated to the throne.

I am reminded of a prophetic comment by a journalist friend in Shimla. Following Mrs. Gandhi's death Doordarshan was giving live coverage to people queuing up before her body to pay their homage. Looking at Rajiv Gandhi and his son Rahul, then in early teens, my friend remarked, "We have a glimpse of three generations of our prime ministers — past (Mrs. Gandhi), present (Mr. Rajiv) and future (Mr. Rahul)".

Only exception to the rule during the last about 40 years was in 1991 when Mr. Rajiv was unfortunately killed. His widow, then, refused to take the reins of the party, then not in power but in opposition. Till then she had not thought it fit even to be an ordinary member of the Congress Party. In March 1996 she came out from her self-imposed political exile, joined the Congress and in just two months was catapulted into the position of national Presidentship of the party. She was, at one time, projected as the prime ministerial candidate and in what circumstances she renunciated her claim and brought in Dr. Manmohan Singh as Prime Minister is a matter of discussion and controversy.

In democracy, people are enrolled into party as ordinary members. They rise to be leaders through a long and tedious process of perseverance, strife and struggle. This is not true either of the three Gandhis — Mr. Sanjay or Mr. Rajiv Gandhi or Mrs. Sonia or now Mr. Rahul.

Since then in the ruling Congress Party dynasty has become the rule; democratic election of leader an exception. Like his father and in the present circumstances, how can calling Mr. Rahul as prince or shahzaada be irrelevant and wrong?

If Congress party, despite its claims to be a stickler to the principles of democracy, is not a political dynasty how is it that after some Congressmen entertained some doubts about the capability of Mr. Rahul Gandhi to steer the Congress boat out of the present turbulent times to the bank of power, some threw up the idea of Mrs. Priyanka Gandhi being made the leader instead of looking up to any person beyond the dynasty?

It is not only the Congress, the likes of Rashtriya Janata Dal of Bihar, National Conference in Kashmir, Samajwadi Party of Mr. Mulayam Singh Yadav and the like, too are sailing in the same boat as far as dynastic politics is concerned.

The words shahzaada or sahibzaada we use in our day-to-day parlance. We call our friend or relation's son or daughter as "aapke shahzaade or shahzaadi or aapke sahibzaade or sahibzaadi". Nobody takes offence to such epithets.

We and our media are used to calling Mr. Amitabh Bacchan as shehanshah, Ms Lata Mangeshkar as "Melody Queen" and Mr. Shah Rukh Khan as "King  

Thursday, September 26, 2013

Shining Strong and Steady Narinder Modi has virtually captured India's political horizon

Shining Strong and Steady
Narinder Modi
has virtually captured India's political horizon

When Gujarat Chief Minister Narinder Modi was, on September 13, anointed by the BJP President Shri Rajnath Singh as party's – and NDA's – prime ministerial candidate for 2014 elections, it was not something unexpected. People knew much earlier that ultimately he alone will emerge as BJP's Man Friday; all they had been waiting was for the formal words from the mouth of BJP President who had been hinting  at it since long. The declaration has only resulted in Mr. Modi painting the country's political horizon saffron – the colour auspicious and sacred as per Indian traditions. He has now arrived on the scene, made his presence felt and effect of his leadership ominous. He left an indelible mark on the minds and hearts of the six crore citizens of his State. He worked for the welfare and development of everyone irrespective of one's caste, creed and sex. This reality ignited in the minds of people all over the country that Mr. Modi is a man of action who means business and can do wonders for the country as he did for his State.

The glow of his work and the fragrance of his achievements were so sweet and strong that it transcended the boundaries of Gujarat to regale one and all in the country. It sparked the feeling: wish they too were one among the Gujaratis. For the captains of industry, Gujarat became a pilgrimage they must undertake to get the boon of having a pride address in this vibrant State.

The news had an instant electrifying effect. The day of announcement was also the day of polling in the Delhi University Student's Union elections. Akhil Bhartiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) campaign was already centred on Modi, his portraits dominating the posters and campaign material. The results joined the chorus of crackers that were burst to hail Mr. Modi being named PM candidate. ABVP won three posts of President, Vice-president and Secretary after a long interval.

Rewari (Haryana) rally on September 15 was planned much earlier. It turned out to be one of the greatest by any non-ruling party, particularly BJP which has not much presence in the State assembly at present. It attracted about 3 lakh strong cheering crowd. "Modi was the chant, Modi the speaker and Modi the leader", English daily put it. Those present vouchsafed for "his all encompassing appeal, charisma and star power".

The 25th September Bhopal rally addressed by Mr. Modi as also Mr. L. K. Advani which besides Mr. Rajnath Singh, MP CM Shivraj Singh Chouhan and party's top national leadership turned out to be an epoch-making one. According to media reports, more than 7 lakh people participated and a team of the Guinnese Book of Records was there to record the greatest rally.

The post-anointment opinion polls have given BJP one-up in all the four States of Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan and Delhi going to the polls in just another two-three months, although in Delhi it is reported to be not that much comfortable as elsewhere.

The Modi bang seems to have unnerved UPA. The day after former chief of army staff General V. K. Singh joined the Modi rally, an inquiry has been instituted by government against him obviously to browbeat the brave soldier. Further, CBI which had earlier taken the stand that it had "sufficient proof" against Samajwadi Party supremo Mulayam Singh Yadav suddenly found empty its bag of "sufficient evidence" against him in the DA case. The CBI has also become super-active in the Ishrat Jahan 'fake encounter' case to complete the assigned task before the nation goes in for Lok Sabha polls.

The daring decision by BJP chief Rajnath Singh has once again proved that BJP is a party with a difference. It has given a lie to the prophets of doom. It does possess full internal democracy where every leader and worker has a right to express his opinion freely and frankly but once the party comes to a collective conclusion it is a decision of one and all to be religiously respected. The decision on Mr. Modi has once again put a seal on this great characteristic of the party.

The Modi decision has also raised the stock of Mr. Rajnath Singh in the country. He has now come to be regarded as a man of mettle who can handle difficult situations in his stride and can weather all storms  remaining steadfast in his determination. In consultation with the top leadership he took a bold decision and the timing and implementation of the strategy too was his.  He came out with flying colours in the end. 

The catapult of Mr. Modi from the vibrant State of Gujarat to the national scene was the process of natural evolution as he consistently achieved the highest rate of GDP growth year after year despite the fact that the State had to pass through two unanticipated great disasters: the Kutch earthquake and the 2002 riots.  He made history by rebuilding the houses razed to the ground and rehabilitating in just one year the people and areas severely devastated.

He was quick to marshal the State police and the military strength to control of post-Godhara riots. Had he not acted in time the extend of carnage would have been much more heinous. It goes to his credit that hundreds of cases have been taken to their logical conclusion in courts after speedy investigations and hundreds have been punished, both high and low, irrespective of caste, creed and political affiliation. This stands in contrast to the 1984 anti-Sikh riots where more than double the number (compared to Gujarat riots) of Sikhs and Sikhs alone were butchered and that too only in Congress-ruled States. Those who were named by victims as the perpetrators of progrom against Sikhs were only Congress leaders yet none was hauled up immediately. On the contrary, they were prized and made party MPs and ministers. The bereaved families are still running pillar to post in search of justice which has eluded to more than 95 percent of families even after about 29 years.

Mr. Narendra Modi pulled Gujarat out of the debris of the two great tragedies in no time and turned it a model state of development in the country. He set the standards for others to follow. It was because of the fast growth in Gujarat and other BJP ruled States of Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Himachal Pradesh, Bihar when BJP was part of the alliance, etc. which recorded a much higher rate of growth than the national average. Had the performance in these States not been that spectacular, country's GDP growth rate would have been much lower. The anti-Modi elements both in Congress, UPA and the so-called 'secular' front got a hard punch when Union government's own statistics showed that minorities, particularly the Muslims, had a much higher per capita income and led a much better life in Gujarat than in non-BJP States.

Because of Mr. Modi's wonders in his home State he became a household name all over the country. The more his detractors tried to run him down, the more he bounced forward with greater force. In the end he emerged the winner.
The more his political enemies tried to block his emergence on the national scene, the more space he started getting in the media. It was the controversies that his political foes generated to raise a scare about him that made him the doyen of the common man. The country witnessed the evolution of Mr. Narendra Modi as the voice and vision of the masses. He was not being imposed by the party bosses from above; he emerged as the choice of the people. "Modi lao" became the common refrain. He earned the support even of those who had, in the past, never supported BJP.

The messengers of doom had spread the scare that if Mr. Modi were made the PM candidate, a 1996 situation will arise when no 'secular' party was forthcoming to support to Vajpayee's NDA government. But within 10 days the BJP has received warming up signals from the Telugu Desam Party, Karnataka Janta Party of BS Yedyurappa and others.  

Saturday, April 27, 2013



The JD(U) has recognized the right of BJP as the largest constituent of the NDA  to have its prime ministerial candidate stressing that it would support him/her only if he possessed “secular credentials”.
But neither JD(U) nor any other political organization has so far ever been able to define what constitutes “secular credentials”. So how to determine who has these and who doesn’t?
By all counts, India is – and has been -- a secular country all through.  India’s Constitution too has been secular in word and spirit. Yet, for reasons unexplained – and perhaps to appeal to the constituency of minority votes – the late Prime Minister Mrs. Indira Gandhi, through a Constitutional amendment in 1976 got the words “secular” and “socialist” added to the Preamble to the Constitution.
That Mrs. Gandhi did not, deliberately, venture to define the word “secular” is a clear indication to the functioning of her mind at that time. She wanted to keep it vague to use it as a tool against her opponents.
In fact, secularism in India has less to do with society and more with politics. It is a tool to strike at one’s opponents. Here every political and organisation claims to be ‘secular’ and lashes ouy at its opponent as ‘communal’. An individual and political party remains ‘communal’ as long as they remain antagonistic to the other. The moment they change their stand and support the other, overnight they become secular. In 1996 the United Front of H. D. Deve Gowda tried its best to rope in Akali Dal into its fold. When it failed, like grapes are sour, Akali Dal too became ‘communal’.
Except perhaps for Congress (though some Congress leaders did join BJP), at one time or the other since 1967 when Congress was enemy No. 1 of communist and socialist parties, the latter entered into a marriage of convenience to share the bed of power with Jana Sangh and later avtar Bharatiya Jana Sangh. They had no qualms of conscience when in 1977 they invited the ‘communal’ Jana Sangh with declared RSS links to merge with their parties to form a new political outfit called Janata Party which dethroned the mighty Congress from power at the Centre and many States. Everything worked smoothly till Janata Party remained in power. It was only after losing power that the thorn of Jana Sangh ‘communalism’ started pricking them. The great ‘secularist’ late V. P. Singh had no hesitation to welcome Jana Sangh’s new avtar BJP’s outside support to get PM’s throne. The conscience of communist parties did not prick when they shared common blocks of UF supporters in Parliament. The Muslim outfits like the Indian Union Muslim League, the successors to Jinnah’s Muslim League,  whose membership is restricted to Muslims only, are ‘secularists’ and Akali Dal and BJP who have every caste and religion in their fold are branded ‘communal’ when they do not see eye to eye with some self-proclaimed ‘secularists’.
‘Secularism’ is an alien concept which emerged in the West broadly meaning that the Church will have nothing to do with administration. Still it has no standard or legal definition.  This puts a great flexibility in the hands of our politicians.  A great hoax and hypocrisy, in instance, is the support and opposition to the Babri masjid and Ram Mandir in Ayodhya. For all intents and purposes, both are religious issues, though the Mandir has nationalist connotation too. Yet, those who support Masjid are ‘seculars’ and those who champion the cause of the Mandir ‘communalists’. Nobody can explain the logic and ‘secularists’ remain self-righteous.
At times, secularism comes in conflict with the spirit of nationalism and ‘secularists’ are too willing to sacrifice their nationalism at the altar of ‘secularism’. That explains the fact that when Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi defined secularism as “India first”, it raised  our ‘secular-liberal’ intelligentsia’s eyebrows. “India first” means that country comes first; we are Indians first and our religion, caste, region and language come afterwards. But that does not humour the ‘secularists’.
Various scholars have tried to define ‘secular’ in their own way. The most appropriate working definition which could suit the Indian conditions seems to be that of Donald E. Smith, Professor of Political Science in Pennsylvania University who said a secular state is the one “which guarantees individual and corporate freedom of religion, deals with the individual as a citizen irrespective of his religion, is not constitutionally connected to a particular religion, nor does it seek to promote or interfere with religion". 
Going by these definitions or by its own concept JD(U) needs to enumerate what it calls “secular credentials” and how does a person, like  Mr. Narendra Modi, does not possess it.   
If the 2002 riots stands in the way of “secular credentials” of a person like Mr. Modi, how could, in these circumstances,  how does the blot of’84 riots does not in the way of Mr. Rajiv Gandhi and his Congress who continue to be the epitome of ‘secularism’? In that case, Nitish’s new found infatuation for Congress motivated by whatever reasons may put his own “secular credentials” in question.
There is something more than meets the eye in the design of JD(U)’s latest hostility towards Mr. Modi. Even for the 2009 Lok Sabha polls BJP had declared its prime ministerial candidate only in December 2008. But   JD(U) has been raising the pitch for the last more than six months back for BJP coming out with its hopeful, about more than 18 months earlier. And mark the stark contrast. Nobody in the UPA is raising heckles for naming its prime ministerial candidate here and now. The common refrain with politicians when asked by media on such matters is that “they will cross the bridge when it comes”. But JD)U), for unexplained reasons, seems to be wanting to strategise how to cross the bridge that is, as yet, miles and miles away.

Saturday, March 30, 2013

Why Cong failed to work wonders which Modi did with Central funds in Gujarat?

Why Cong failed to work wonders which Modi did with Central funds in Gujarat?

So at last the Congress confesses, though belatedly, that Mr. Narinder Modi has worked wonders in development in Gujarat, but with a rider that development works in Gujarat were being implemented using Central funds and that he had not done “anything significant”. That is what the Union Minister Kapil Sibal said on March 29 in New Delhi. ( The legal eagle Sibal has once again proved that he thrives in the art of being illogical in what he believesto be his great logic

Firstly, Mr. Sibal needs to understand that the “central funds” are not the Congress  party’s own money raised through donations from big business.  It is public money and if any public money is given to any state government by a Central government, it is not a favour on the state government or its people. It is people’s own money, their own hard-earned money, their right and sanctioning it for development of the people in States is the ruling government’s bounden duty mandated by the people.

Secondly, it the Central funds, so kindly sanctioned by the Manmohan government, are fhe magic wand, why has the Central government itself or the Congress-ruled governments have failed to strike the same wonders in development which Mr. Narendra Modi has succeeded in doing in Gujarat? Why is that the GDP growth of Gujarat is about three times more than that of the ‘kind donar’ Manmohan government? If the Manmohan government’s this ‘wonder money’ can work wonders in the GDP growth of the non-Congress states like Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar etc. , why had it failed to strike the same magic in Manmohan’s own government? Had GDP growth not been that much higher than that of Manmohan Government, Union government’s achievement on this score would have been still lower.

Obviously ridiculing Mr. Narinder Modi without taking his name by saying that if “somebody wins three times and thinks he is a contender (for the post of Prime Minister).And he has not done anything significant there, whatever has been done is through central funds," Mr. Sibal was exposing himself to be ridiculous who does not believe in democracy and has no respect for the will of the people. Mr. Sibal must understand that in democracy everybody has a right to entertain an ambition to be a prime ministerial candidate. And merely wishing does not make a person a prime minister. It is not individuals like Mr. Sibal, Congress Party, BJP or any other political organisation which can make any person a prime minister. It is finally the verdict of the people which makes and unmakes an individual. He forgets that it was individuals like him who had joined a chorus as early as in 1996 even that Mrs. Sonia Gandhi should be prime minister when she had,  as yet, not enrolled herself as an ordinary member of Congress Party and had as yet not contested even a single election. When Mr. Rahul Gandhi won the 2004 Lok Sabha elections for the first time, Mr. Sibal was one of the numerous Congress leaders who joined the rant for making Mr.Rahul the prime minister although that victory was not his personal one. Though he is now only in his second term as MP, yet it wil be a sheer exaggeration and hypocrisy to say that his own victory and that of the Congress then was because of Mr. Rahul, notwithstanding his poor showing in last year’s UP Vidhan Sabha elections  where Congress faired very badly in his own and his mother’s parliamentary constituencies. Yet, the Congress chorus for making him prime minister continus unabated by persons like Mr. Sibal.

On the contrary, people like Mr. Sibal try to trivialise the three time win for himself and his BJP in Gujarat which is as much a Modi win as is it that of the BJP. The people of the State irrespective of their caste and creed have given a big hand to Mr. Modi despite his detractors’ false propaganda to the contrary. Yet, the likes of Mr. Sibal have the cheek to ridicule people’s dermand for making Mr. Narendra Modi as the prime minister. So far Mr. Modi himself has never uttered a word on the issue. If people like Mr. Sibal and his Congress colleagues have the right to propose that Mr. Rahul (and earlier, Mrs. Sonia Gandhi) be the prime minister, how can they deny the same right to other leaders if they speak for Mr. Narendra Modi? Is democracy the dynastic property of people like Mr. Sibal to the exclusion of all others who do not agree with them?

We do expect Mr. Sibal to inform and educate the people who do not agree with him with this illogical logic?