India is a continent having over a billion people. Indian population represents 20% of the entire humanity. The role of government is vital to secure the well-being of a huge population, as we are closing on the General Elections 2014 - the parties and players are scrutinised clinically by the electorate. The main contenders namely Congress & BJP have a national presence though their reach is limited to 400 seats out of 545 seats to be contested. The formation of UPA & NDA is made to spread the reach to the entire 545 parliamentary seats. Lately, the allies in both formations have played a decisive role in governance. Yet the most crucial factor is the person leading the respective collation to form the next government. Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi or Manmohan Singh may be the collective face of the Congress party in GE 2014. It looks highly unlikely that Dr Manmohan Singh will get the third term due to age and health issues, Sonia Gandhi has technically offloaded leadership of the party to Rahul Gandhi by securing the Vice Presidentship of AICC recently to stamp clarity on the leadership of the party. Reluctant Rahul Gandhi is trying to push himself on the forced assignment but the inherent trait of lust for power is missing in him. Leadership in India seeks 24x7 commitment, amateur approach will lead to a disaster for any leader. Though the biggest asset of Rahul Gandhi is that he is a level-headed person, not obsessed with power Is it enough to rule India?
BJP has a leader that completely fits in with a right-wing party ideology. Narender Modi is disliked by the entire top leadership of his own party, and allies but the party cadre loves him. The popular public pressure to make him a leader has forced party ideologue RSS to ignore the entire party leadership and secure him as the supreme leader of the BJP. Many allies parted away but NaMo has stood tall to take lead in the campaign for GE 2014. Surely Gujrat is not India, Can he deliver without the cooperation of the top leadership of his party and allies? NDA is a nonstarter even before the elections were announced.
The so-called third front is a mess with several leaders high-jacking politics on religion and caste base, just hoping for a miracle. The family-run parties namely SP, Akali Dal, INLD, RJD, JMM, DMK, JD (S), YSR (Cong), NCP reflects the poor intra-party democratic system in India. The left parties have no confidence left, recently Prakash Karat initiated Mulayam Singh's name for the PM post.
Surely there is a crisis of pan-India leadership. Reluctant Rahul Gandhi and controversial Narender Modi are the best bet to run the show by virtue of respective party strength but the natural acceptance and admiration for a leader greatly missing in both of them. Modi has the performance to back his claim but Rahul reluctance to shoulder responsibility has pushed him to the back foot. The strategic teams operating for the respective party will have the task cut out to secure the confidence of the electorate in the next GE 2014, the most unpredictable and difficult elections of recent times. May the best person win.
London: It appears that the attempt to manipulate Lashkare-Toiba operative Ishrat Jehan's death to persuade Narendra Modi to withdraw from India's prime-ministerial race has more sinister roots than immediately apprehended. An insider with intimate knowledge of Anglo-American policy towards India suggested that a virtual resolution of the historic Kashmir issue has already been negotiated discreetly through the intercession of Washington. It seems an understanding has been reached with Manmohan Singh's government that major Indian concessions would be on the table.
Apparently, this entire package would be in jeopardy if Narendra Modi were to become prime minister of India.
Pakistan, whose rapid acquisition of nuclear weapons' capability is considered an urgent problem, including its known proliferation activities, is prepared to reciprocate with suitable steps acceptable to Washington. It is hoped that the lowering of India-Pakistan tensions would also reduce the dangers of a nuclear exchange that would have devastating wider global consequences. Pakistan will also restrain the Taliban and accept a half-way house in its expedition to control Afghanistan's destiny though Hamid Karzai will apparently have to depart.
The grim inference is that the incumbent Indian government is not entirely in dissonance with Pakistani agencies, including the Inter-Services Intelligence and its arms-length proxy, the Lashkar-e-Toiba, to corner Narendra Modi. The evident bonhomie between the two parties is a product of Washington's mediation, which is keen to retrieve something from the mess of its Afghan misadventure. Certainly, the elimination of Narendra Modi, physically if need be, as some observers, including myself, have warned of, would suit some quarters because otherwise he is guaranteed to propel the Bharatiya Janata Party ahead at the 2014 general elections.
Private polling has been showing that in the best-case scenario, the Sonia Gandhi Congress would simply not have the numbers to consider forming a government, even if the BJP itself failed to approach the magic number of 220 seats. An interesting question is the extent of involvement of some senior BJP leaders and their advisers in this colossal conspiracy. Some have enjoyed close ties with United States' agencies since the Cold War period when Nehruvian nonalignment was considered nothing short of support for the Soviet Union. Even closer ties have evolved between some leaders through the intervention of a prominent Indian business family in London who have always been US surrogates.
The so-called solution to the Kashmir dispute would almost certainly be based on the four-point formula suggested by the former Pakistan military president, Parvez Musharraf. It entails softening of Line of Control (LoC), self-governance, phased withdrawal of troops from entire Jammu and Kashmir and joint supervision by India and Pakistan. Pakistan is confident that such a plan would enable it to absorb the entire Kashmir Valley eventually making Indian resistance to such an outcome both politically costly and militarily expensive. Publicly-aired Pakistani misgivings about Musharraf's four-point formula when it was first out-lined were officially sponsored to create the impression that Pakistan would only acquiesce reluctantly. The idea was to make the Indian public believe that it was the gainer from the agreement. However, in private, there was widespread official consensus that the agreement would be a prelude to Pakistan gaining full sovereignty over the Kashmir Valley and possibly even more. The survival of other areas under Indian control would be rendered untenable if Pakistan were to achieve political suzerainty over the Valley and some adjacent areas.
The interim policy, in the aftermath of the agreement being fully implemented, would be to embark on a policy of demographic assault that has already succeeded in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. The extensive marital links between PoK Kashmiris and Punjabis, for example, has ensured huge support for the Lashkar-e-Toiba's activities against India. It is reasoned that encouraging marriage between residents of India's Kashmir Valley and those on the Pakistani side with the help of local religious authorities would create a growing constituency within the Kashmir Valley that would be Pakistani in essence.
It is concluded that it would be impossible for the Indian authorities to In a recent interview with BJP leader Narendra Modi By Reuters Staff Ross Colvin and Sruthi Gottipati, Narender Modi was candid in explaning the fall out of Godhra tragedy in his characteristic mode.
Is it frustrating that many people still define you by 2002?
People have a right to be critical. We are a democratic country. Everyone has their own view. I would feel guilty if I did something wrong. Frustration comes when you think "I got caught. I was stealing and I got caught." That's not my case.
Do you regret what happened?
I'll tell you. India's Supreme Court is considered a good court today in the world. The Supreme Court created a special investigative team (SIT) and top-most, very bright officers who overlook oversee the SIT. That report came. In that report, I was given a thoroughly clean chit, a thoroughly clean chit. Another thing, any person if we are driving a car, we are a driver, and someone else is driving a car and we're sitting behind, even then if a puppy comes under the wheel, will it be painful or not? Of course it is. If I'm a chief minister or not, I'm a human being. If something bad happens anywhere, it is natural to be sad.
Should your government have responded differently?
Up till now, we feel that we used our full strength to set out to do the right thing.
But do you think you did the right thing in 2002?
Absolutely. However much brainpower the Supreme Being has given us, however much experience I've got, and whatever I had available in that situation and this is what the SIT had investigated.
Do you believe India should have a secular leader?
We do believe that … But what is the definition of secularism? For me, my secularism is, India first. I say, the philosophy of my party is 'Justice to all. Appeasement to none.' This is our secularism.
Report complied by Prakhar Prakash Mishra Political Editor Opinion Express.
curb this development because there would be an international human rights' outcry. It is also perfectly well-known in Pakistan that India has failed to stop the massive migration of Bangladeshis into India which has grown to startling proportions in many cities far removed from the Indo-Bangladesh border. The result of such demographic changes would also guarantee the election of governments in Kashmir that would favour Anschluss with Pakistan.
Once such an elected government agitated, in the first instance, for closer ties with their Pakistani co-religionists, prior to elevating the demand to formal accession, the Indian government would be left in an unenviable position. It would have to consider intervening militarily from a position of huge political and military weakness. The Indian authorities would have to arrest very large numbers of Kashmiri politicians, stop all electoral processes and embark on a military crackdown that would result in massive casualties. The inter-national and domestic Indian reaction to such a response to adverse developments can easily be anticipated. It appears Pakistan has leveraged its nuclear weapons with extraordinary success. By contrast, India's aspiration to great power status would be in tatters, reduced to a weak, minor player.
In addition, it can be safely predicted that Pakistan will find ways to pre-vent India reaping any sort of peace dividend, by reducing military commitments on the India-Pakistan border once an agreement with Pakistan on Kashmir has been implemented. Such a peace dividend for India would be opposed implacably by Pakistan's all-weather friend, China, itself examining every option for cutting India down to size. Any reductions in military commitments in relation to Pakistan would immediately mitigate India's two-front war threat that alarms its defence planners. China will make sure that Pakistani redeployments in the after-math of any peace deal with India will nevertheless remain a sufficient threat to prevent any significant Indian reduction in commitments against Pakistan. Indeed it may well be hazarded that the loss of Kashmir to Pakistan will create a strategic nightmare for India owing to altered military options on the ground and require even greater attention to the India-Pakistan border. The final denouement will be in the shape of an emboldened Pakistan facing an India militarily and politically weakened by the loss of Kashmir. Nothing that has transpired in the past sixty years suggests that Pakistan will abandon its determined quest to rival India, having emerged victorious over Kashmir.
As the conspiracy unfolds to derail Narendra Modi's pursuit for national power, though he enjoys massive support along the length and breadth of the country, many outwardly innocuous events acquire more significance. The successful campaign that stopped Narendra Modi from even addressing a mere student gathering in the United States is likely to have been officially instigated. The same officials responsible for intervening against Narendra Modi also hold compromising files on the alternative to him, pertaining to his corrupt financial dealings and personal peccadilloes.
Former US spy, Edward Snowden, has highlighted the extraordinary reach and assiduity with which information is collected by Anglo-American intelligence agencies on even their closest allies. He has also confirmed that India enjoys a special place on their intrusive radar. It is they who have been collecting evidence on the murky social life and financial dealings abroad of their preferred candidate for prime minister of India.
Editor's note: Intelligence Bureau officials have sounded the warning that they are under enormous pressure from the ruling Congress party to implicate Narendra Modi in the Ishrat Jehan case. A particularly vocal Congress party general secretary has been meeting and harassing Central Bureau of Investigation and Intelligence Bureau officials to manufacture evidence against the Gujarat chief minister. There is desperation in ruling party circles as Modi nears his goal of becoming prime minister. The Intelligence Bureau is resisting the pressure and there is growing resentment within the institution about this. Worse is expect-ed in the coming days unless Manmohan Singh steps in and ceases the witch-hunt against Narendra Modi.
A report from overseas press. The writer has taught Political Economy at the London School of Economics. (Expressed views are personal opinion of the writer)
UPA or NDA government headed by Rahul Gandhi or Narender Modi in 2014 is a big question for millions of Indians now. UPA II can be termed a total disaster with an all-around failure on the economic front, internal security, international diplomacy, and disaster management. The country is completely in confusion, leadership is clueless and people are suffering. The success of UPA I with the clean leadership of Dr Manmohan Singh fuelled huge expectations within the country that India will prosper and flourish but the country witnessed various scams namely CWG, 2G, Coal, Railways, and food at regular intervals. The external boundaries were challenged by neighbouring countries especially China's intrusion into Indian territory became a regular issue, Naxal activities were taken to next level wherein the entire top leadership of Congress from Chattisgarh was wiped out in a single day. On the fiscal front, the rupee slide is unabated, the manufacturing industry is bleeding, and no headway is made on the improvement of infrastructure.
Even the disaster management post-Uttrakhand tragedy can be termed as total gross negligence of government responsibilities. The country is seeking answers from the ruling elite for the mess that we are witnessing. Now the bigger question is the solution to the problems that we are facing in India. The personalities are not important but the solution to problems is the key. Surely Narender Modi has shown a better governance model in Gujrat but it is a small sample size to judge his ability to guide the destiny of India. India is a continent, it needs mature leadership with a tremendous vision to succeed as a nation. India has been blessed by top visionary leadership in Rajiv Gandhi, PV Narsimha Rao, Atal Bihari Vajpayee for two decades but the two power center in UPA II has damaged various institutions in the last decade. The first phase of UPA I was surprisingly successful but the second phase has opened tremendous weaknesses in governance. The most honest PM Dr Singh was forced to lead the most corrupt regime making a mockery of several institutions including the CBI, ED, Income Tax, and judiciary in the country.
Now the country is seeking a firm answer, the countrymen are angry and frustrated. On every small issue touching general people, the crowd is visible on roads. The emergence of Naxal in almost one-third of India is an indication that the government has failed. Rahul Gandhi or Narender Modi must focus on getting their respective house in order before reaching out to over a billion people to seek a mandate to run the country.
Lastly, the disaster in Utttakhand must be taken seriously by policymakers in India. The corruption in urban planning regulatory mechanisms has destroyed the landscape of our country. The development authorities across India are destroying the urban planning process, threatening the life of millions of countrymen. The Uttrakhand tragedy is just an indicator of a highly corrupt system that we are forced to accept. The disaster management policy and its execution post-accident remain a laughing stock for us. As a country, we must put better logistical planning in force to run the administration. Every Uttrakhand tragedy or Chattisgarh Naxal attack portrays an extremely poor picture of the country to the outside world. Can we stake claim to the emerging super power tag for India?
A person becomes hope for millions, certainly Narender Modi must be complimented for the extraordinary achievement. India is a continent, it is not a country. Over billion people are living in India hence to be the hope of India is huge responsibility. The elevation of Narendra Modi through popular demand has democratized the Bharatiya Janata Party. From a patriarchal system where the elders of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and of the party decided things, Modi has forcibly brought in elements of an open system where merit and democratic appeal inside the party will determine its direction. Such a takeover of a major political party by an individual purely on his credentials and popularity has no precedent in India.
In the two decades from the formation of the party to the time that it took power in the late 1990s, the BJP was controlled by only two very competent presidents - Atal Bihari Vajpayee and LK Advani (with one short term for Murli Manohar Joshi). When the party formed the government in Delhi and both Vajpayee and Advani held ministerial responsibility, the party presidency was finally let go of by them.
In this period, to communicate the idea of an open democratic system that was unlike the closed dynastic system of the Congress, BJP presidents continued to be elected. But because the rivalry was strong between Vajpayee and Advani, this president was a safe person, meaning someone neutral, and with no base of his own. And so the BJP had presidents like Kushabhau Thakre, Jana Krishnamurthy, Bangaru Laxman and Venkaiah Naidu. They were picked through consensus between the rivals, not through competitive elections, meaning the system was actually closed and not open. The cadre did not have a say in the choice of their leader.
These men did not make any changes or define a new direction for the party, and they were not supposed to. They were placeholders, and held office till the big boys came back to play. The important aspect is that because the system was closed, no new leadership actually emerged in the BJP through the popular route.
The disappearance from public life of Vajpayee after his defeat in 2004 and the eclipse of Advani within the party (about which more later) after his defeat in 2009 exposed this vacuum and opened up the space for someone to take the national leadership. It was assumed that this would be someone from inside the closed system. The BJP had some leaders who were "national", like Sushma Swaraj, Pramod Mahajan and Arun Jaitley, groomed for bigger things, and some who were "regional" like Modi and other state chief ministers.
This division did not indicate true levels of power. Jaitley for instance has never contested an election and has no popular appeal. Advani's visit to Pakistan in 2005 and his concession to Jinnah put off a cadre that craved someone who would take them back to first principles, meaning the muscular Hindutva that had propelled it to power.
This is when Modi emerged as his own man. A confluence of things - first, the killings of 2002 and the proven involvement of his ministers (one of who has been convicted), second, his no-nonsense image and refusal to play by the rules of inclusive secularism, such as wearing skull-caps and hosting iftaars, and third, his competent man-aging of Gujarat's economy and the praise of corporate leaders - has made him a national figure.
He attracted the core BJP worker and voter because of the first two things, and also large parts of the middle class. The media, which is usually wary of communal politics, has been neutralised through the third aspect, corporate endorsement of Modi.
The selection/election of Modi as the head of the party's campaign for 2014 has actually made him more powerful within the party than its president, Rajnath Singh, because it reveals him as the popular choice within the party. Modi gives the lower rungs of the BJP and the RSS what they want, a full-throated and uncompromisingly Hindu nationalist leadership which radiates strength and power. Even if Modi per-forms poorly in the election of 2014, he will retain control of the BJP. This is because his power comes directly from the cadre of both the BJP and the RSS, and the groundswell has opened up the closed system. or Narendra Modi's supporters there is nothing beyond the 2014 elections. So every alliance bro-ken, every leader brushed aside and every political leader who criticises is meant to be set aside as the Gujarat Chief Minister's campaign machinery rolls on towards the 2014 polls. But are the numbers against him?
In an excellent analysis of the 'Modi phenomenon' in India in the Indian Express, Ashutosh Varshney notes that the Gujarat Chief Minister would need to be a trailblazer of sorts rarely seen in India before and maybe his supporters and BJP are being a bit too hopeful of an impending victory in 2014. He points out that the BJP has seen its vote share decline over the last three elections to 18.8 percent, and though the party can hope for 18 to 20 percent of the vote share to get to 180 seats, a more practical assumption would be that Modi needs to raise the party's vote share by 5 to 6 percentage points. What is that in numbers assuming an electorate of 800 million votes in the 2014 polls? 25 to 30 million votes.
It isn't impossible to raise one's vote share by that much, and Varshney points to three instances when it happened: in 1984 for the Congress after Indira Gandhi's assassination, in 1991 for the BJP over the Ayodhya temple issue and in 1998 for the BJP, because of allies who delivered the numbers. There is a strong anti-incumbency wave among the electorate against the Congress and the UPA but would it be one that would result in 25 million votes going in Modi's favour? Varshney, maybe rightly, points out that it is unlikely given the Gujarat Chief Minister's personality cult is one that is still resonates only with urban voters. He says:
First, beyond Gujarat, the rural folk, who still determine India's election results, have not heard of the Gujarat model. And it is virtually impossible to turn rural constituencies around in a matter of months. It is a longer political project. Second, it is also not clear that, beyond Gujarat, the urban poor share the urban middle class passion for Modi. And the numbers of the urban poor are substantial. Third, in southern and eastern India, even in cities, the BJP's presence is minimal.
While Varshney finds fault with the numbers against Modi, in an editorial in the Hindu, Harish Khare finds more wrong with the personality cult of the Gujarat Chief Minister, something he claims the BJP has tried to ride on in the past and failed. Pointing to the sup-port of the cadre in favour of the Gujarat Chief Minister, he says:
Mr. Modi is equally entitled to his personality cult. But make no mistake. Mr. Modi is a different personality, not easily amenable to democratic moderation. We should get used to "Rambo" type yarns, as the polity seeks to rede-fine itself in the next general election.
Khare says that the Gujarat Chief Minister may seek to harness the strong anti-incumbency but warns that the drowning voices of dissent against anything anti-Modi doesn't augur well for the democracy that is India.
The liberal perception and numbers may be against the Gujarat Chief Minister and it may explain why the BJP 2014 campaign chief is urging his party members to find allies quickly to create the numbers the party needs to come to power. The Gujarat Chief Minister may also, in some corner, be willing to play along with alliance politics to forgo the Prime Minister's chair for a later innings in 2019 or after. The question is, will his supporters be able to wait?
Narender Modi is trying to model himself on Syama Prasad Mookerjee, he was both a liberal and a nationalist. While much of his politics and time in Government reflected deep nationalism and a realism free of dogma, at his heart were core liberal principles. Reading through the biography written by Madhok one can trace the roots of his liberal nationalism all the way to his days as the Vice Chancellor of Calcutta University in the 1930s at a very young age of 33.
Recounting a convocation address by Mookerjee on February 12, 1936, Madhok cites the following excerpt from that speech which highlights the Liberal Nationalist that Mookerjee was:
"Our ideal is to provide extensive facilities for education from the lowest grade to the highest to mould our educational purpose and to draw out the best qualities that be hidden in our youth and to train them intellectually physically for service in all spheres of national activitty in towns villages cities. Our ideal is to make the widest provision for sound liberal education… Our ideal is to make our universities and educational institutions the home of liberty, sane progressive thought."
One sees the same spirit of Liberal Nationalism emerge through his tenure as Vice Chancellor as he sought to expand access to the University even to who were not enrolled in a regular college. A focus on youth and grooming of the next generation is a recurrent theme in his liberal nationalism.
"I have abundant faith in the glory of youth … they be given a chance to live, an opportunity to enjoy life and the amplest facilities for the development of their health and character."
One also sees during his tenure as the Vice Chancellor an ethic of minimum government. He did not depend on Government or wait for Government to create opportunities for youth. He proactively introduced many measures like abolishing reserved hostels and messes and expanding the curriculum to include sciences and engineering. He was also opposed to the idea of putting limits on higher education to control the number of graduates on the lookout for employment.
Delhi intellectuals fear coming of no-nonsense Modi Syama Prasad Mookerjee's liberal nationalism is evident through his years with the Hindu Mahasabha during the independence struggle as well. In a speech in December 1943, making the case for the Hindu Mahasabha, Mookerjee explains that he stood for no special favours for Hindus but for welfare and advancement of India as a whole. The cynical politics of wordplay on "secularism/communalism" of the Congress predates India's independence. Even an intellectual of Mookerjee's stature was not spared the game of labeling that we continue to see even today.
Many examples of Mookerjee's liber-al nationalism can be found through Balraj Madhok's book. In a speech in 1943 in Amritsar to the Hindu Mahasabha, Mookerjee spoke of how an Idea of India that transcended both caste and religion and that called for political citizenship to everyone without discrimination. In the years after Independence when he was invited to join Nehru's Cabinet as the Minister for Industries, one sees his economic liberalism grounded in the realities of India come through very clearly. Madhok writes:
"He had very clear ideas on the role of private capital in the industrial development of the country as also on the relationship between capital and labour… He was for giving full scope to private enterprise under suitable Government regulation … He wanted government to concentrate its meagre resources on the defence of the realm … he stood for a rational coordination between private and public capital in light of the actual conditions in the country…"
In Balraj Madhok's eyes, Mookerjee a was realist who was not guided by dogma. Citing two examples of how he believed in private enterprise while being pragmatic about economic realities of India, Madhok explains how Mookerjee was opposed to full nationalisation and that he did not believe India had the skills resources to nationalise and run all kinds of industries. At the same time, he also believed that given the realities of labour in India, that there had to be some kind of profit sharing between capital and labour. While investing in public sector enterprises, he also believed that needed professional management independent of Government to make them viable and keep them efficient.
Over the years, after he resigned from Nehru's Cabinet and quit the Hindu Mahasabha before eventually founding the Jan Sangh the liberal national ethic travelled with him. His inaugural presidential address to the Jan Sangh once again sees the same ethic of economic liberalism:
"we stand for well planned decentralized national economy….. against concentration of economic power in cartels…. sanctity of private property will be observed….private enterprise will be given a fair and adequate play….state ownership and state control only where it is needed in public interest….progressive decontrol…"
The issue that saw him most rile up Nehru in Parliament was the Kashmir issue. On this too his position was a liberal national position.
"Kashmir is an integral part of India and should be treated as any other State"
It is a reflection of the perversity that has afflicted much of the intellectual discourse in India that an issue like the demand for abrogation of Article 370, far from being labelled as the liberal national issue that it ought to be, is dismissed as a 'communal' issue or even worse described as a 'Hindutva' issue.
While Mookerjee's political legacy will be coloured by the leftist historians with all kinds of labels, it would be instructive to point out that he commanded even the respect of the Communists through his defence of civil liberties and his opposition to the Preventive Detention Act.
This comment by Mookerjee in response to Nehru's repeated labelling of him as 'communal' brings out the best in him:
"If we try to recover our lost position in a manner 100 per cent consistent with the dynamic principles of Hinduism for which Swami Vivekanand stood, I am proud to be a communalist."
By marking the soft start to what will be deemed to be the campaign for the next Lok Sabha in Madhopur, Narendra Modi will be laying claim to that political legacy of liberal nationalism that Mookerjee stood for many decades back when he founded the Jan Sangh to challenge the Nehru-led Congress's political monopoly in India. All the contentious issues namely Ayodhya Ram temple, abolishing article 370, uniform civil code are delibretely untouched by team Modi to build up international acceptance but the pressure from the cadre and right wing forces within core group of the party will be just waiting to pounce on Modi to express his opinion in public to polarise votes for BJP.
By Prakhar Prakash Mishra, Political Editor
The Congress won a thumping victory in Karnataka to wrest power after a seven year gap, crushing the BJP in a key election ahead of next year's Lok Sabha ballot. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Congress president Sonia Gandhi voiced their satisfaction over the Karnataka result that ended five years of tumultuous rule by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) in the southern state.
The Congress victory "is a clear result against the ideology of the BJP", Manmohan Singh said in New Delhi. "The people of the country know what's what and they will reject the BJP ideology as the result in Karnataka shows." The BJP, which stormed to power in Karnataka in 2008 with the hope of expanding rapidly in south India, was routed. Officials said it may finish along with the Janata Dal-Secular (J-S) at 39 seats each. At one point, the BJP trailed behind the JD-S at the third spot.
The Congress had ruled Karnataka on its own until April 2004. It later governed the state with JD-S backing till February 2006. The state slipped into JD-S and BJP hands after that.
Congress leaders gloated and said they had expected a victory because of the way the BJP ruled Karnataka in the last five years, with infighting seeing three changes in the chief minister's post.
The BJP government was also mired in corruption charges. Finally, BS Yeddyurappa, who led the BJP to victory in 2008 and become its first chief minister, quit the party and formed the rival Karnataka Janata Party (KJP). Although the KJP is expected to bag only eight seats in a house of 225, it played a major role in splitting the pro-BJP vote.
JD-S leader HD Kumaraswamy, who had hoped perhaps to be kingmaker, said he was happy to win almost 40 seats. "We will be happy to be the main opposition. We will play our role well," the former chief minister said.
The Samajwadi Party opened its account for the first time in Karnataka, winning the Channapatna assembly seat some 60 km from Bangalore. The Karnataka result was a morale booster for the Congress at a time the BJP has refused to let parliament run demanding the resignation of central ministers Ashwani Kumar and Pawan Kumar Bansal for impropriety.
The victory was just what the party needed ahead of the general elections due in 2014 but which some say could be held earlier. Said Congress spokesperson Abhishek Singhvi: "We are winning because people have seen through and rejected the BJP."
The Karnataka rout saw several BJP leaders lose, as the party fared poorly both in urban and rural areas all across the state. Karnataka had recorded the second highest polling of 71.29% in the last 35 years after 71.90% in 1978. The Congress is not in power in the state for about seven years now.
Reactions on Karnataka poll result trends:
Ravi Shankar Prasad: This accidental fluke victory of the Congress (is) because of the split in BJP votes.
Kapil Sibal: It looks like the BJP will meet the same fate in the General Elections. They will remain in third place in the general elections as well.
Manish Tewari said: The people of Karnataka have voted. If you really look back, over the manner in which Parliament has been disrupted in the last fortnight it is very evident that the entire charade was orchestrated for the Karnataka elections.
HD Kumaraswamy, JDS state president: I blame the media for our defeat and Congress is becoming bigger party. Media did propaganda against us and provoked people to go against us. We respect people's mandate and accept their verdict and we would sit in the opposition party.
BJP leaders Rajiv Pratap Rudy: Karnataka is a loss, we are upset about it but we knew it would happen.
He, however, rather indirectly defended BJP leader and Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi and his inability to swing votes for the party in the state, saying: "When does any political party say that their leader has a magic wand? What is wrong if a leader has a magic wand?"
K Siddaramaiah is the to be Karnataka's new Chief Minister. The 121 Congress MLAs elected by the people of the state voted via secret ballot to elect him this evening. Mr Siddaramaiah won the backing of a majority 75 MLAs. Governor H Bhardwaj has invited Mr Siddaramaiah to form the government. Addressing the press after his election, Mr Siddaramaiah said that the immediate challenge is to put the state's administration the right track.
Mr Siddaramaiah is a backward caste leader from the Kuruba community with a big support base, especially in the Old Mysore region in the south.
He has been Opposition leader and was among those who scripted the Congress' successful campaign. He is a five-time MLA and represents the Varuna constituency in Mysore district. Once part of the Janata Dal (Secular) and an HD Deve Gowda protege, Mr Siddaramaiah has been a Congressman for only about six years.
Mr Siddaramaiah edged Union minister Mallikarjun Kharge, his closest contender for the post. A Congressman all his political life, Mr Kharge has registered a formidable electoral record - he has won nine straight times from the Gulbarga region in north Karnataka. The Dalit leader has always been in the running for the Chief Minister's job, but like before, lost out this time too.
A central Congress team headed by Defence Minister AK Antony oversaw the election of the new Chief Minister. The team included junior sports minister Jitendra Singh, All India Congress Committee (AICC) general secretary in-charge of Karnataka, Madhusudan Mistry, and AICC general secretary Luizinho Faleiro.
Report by Sub Editor Sachin Naik from Bangalore
Karnataka elections results are along the predictable lines, many opinion polls and exit polls have scored right on seats prediction. Congress has emerged as the winner, BJP has been demolished and Janata Dal (Secular) refuses to be written off. The national parties were eying big in Karnataka primarily to consolidate platform for upcoming Lok Sabha elections, off course Congress won and BJP facilitated the victory. First, there is no sweeping sentiment; Congress has won by a slim margin in the 224-seat house and that is therefore no endorsement of its brave assertion of 'we survive everything'.
Second, national issues had little bearing, and like most states Karnataka voted on the basis of factors that affect the daily lives of the people - things like governance and civic amenities. BJP state leadership and its central leadership has messed up the government right from onset of its formation of its first government in any southern state. Yeddyurappa, Reddy brothers in Bangalore and Anant Kumar and Venkya Naidu in collaboration of their god father's in Delhi has delivered worst BJP government of the many states ruled by BJP in India.
Interestingly, while an indicted Yeddyurappa, who also bears the ignominy of being the first chief minister of India to go to jail, had the ability to dent his former party, the tainted Reddy brothers have received a drubbing in Bellary. Overall, despite the victory, Congress should ideally not be in a celebratory mood and there is no reason for them to gloat about their triumph in the south. What they must accept is that Karnataka elections are neither a positive verdict on the scam soiled government at the Centre nor a defeat of the BJP ideology, as asserted by PM Manmohan Singh.
If anything Karnataka elections are about what factionalism can do to a corruption riddled party, which cares little for governance issues. And if that is the reading, Congress better watch the wall for results in 2014 though with a rider that Congress despite corruption allegations has looked a unit under Sonia Gandhi. But scams has destroyed UPA I clean governance impact as 2G, CWG, Coalgate, Rail-gate plus serious law & order breakdown specially crime on women, handling of China misadventure has firmed up the believe that there is a huge disconnect of government with public. Anna & Baba Ramdev agitations are gradually dying but the spontaneous people participation on every outcry indicates that people by and large are restless.
Karnataka BJP is punished for corruption, non performance and now 2014 general elections would be acid test for UPA II lead by Congress party to face the public ire. Thankfully, UPA II looks a better performing unit than miserable Karnataka BJP unit.
Rampant corruption, inflation, sagging economy, rape, loot & murders!! India comprise of 2.5% landmass of the total land available to humans and 18% of the entire world’s population is living here. The native are completely stressed out by the sheer lack of natural resource availability. The corruption, internal security crisis, rape, inflation are offshoot of the massive population explosion that India has witnessed in the last few years. Post Independence, the planners have failed to visualize this enormous crisis that is potentially more dangerous that a ticking nuclear bomb.
The governance in India is failing rapidly irrespective of party and leadership, people are on roads every time there is slight instigation on anti-corruption rallies, rape protest, religious unrest. Now we need a visionary leadership that thinks for the nation rather than immediate seat of power, else we are doomed. The population time bomb is likely to demolish us in a very near future. The crisis is unprecedented and we have limited solutions, China model of one child is partly successful but it will lead to the ageing problem in next three-decade that country like Japan is facing today.
Surely with the limited options, we are riding a tiger. Yes, the governance is lacking teeth because we have no established pan India leadership. Congress party now under Rahul Gandhi or BJP under Narender Modi have limited influence in certain pockets of the country. The regional parties have no accountability; all of them are largely driven by caste and religious lines wherein the chief of the party acts like landlord with no development agenda in hand. Today we have almost 50% of the state governments that are in clutches of regional strongman hence the universal macro development of the country is a distant dream. To lay uniform laws for entire country is impossible now with conflict of interest amongst regional political parties.
How we can bring national pride to entire India? How we can impart universal governance to all? How to impart instant Justice System? India must adopt uniform civil code with strict implementation to safeguard our macro national interest. We need to solve this puzzle soon or just accept the fact that we may have to live in a system that has failed us and people will be seen more on roads agitating for every small issue that circumstances will throw to them.
Rahul Gandhi may still become the prime minister because there is no one in Congress with a pan-Indian appeal who can be a challenger. But, the chances of him making a dramatic impact on the Indian scene are remote. He has refused to take responsibility in the government to showcase his caliber hence he remains an unknown commodity to the nation. It is noteworthy that after Nehru, the only ideological direction to the polity was given by someone who was not a member of the dynasty. Moreover, Narasimha Rao's achievement was that he turned away from the Nehruvian preoccupation with a 'socialistic pattern of society', as a Congress resolution of 1955 stated. For the last two decades, however, it is Rao's direction that the country has been following, rejecting in the process the other Nehruvian concept of non-alignment.
What is worrying, however, is that Rahul may seek to reinvent the socialistic wheel. But, even more, bothersome is the fact that there is no certainty about his intentions because he has maintained a deafening silence about his ideological convictions. It is odd that although he can become the prime minister in three years, no one knows what he stands for. Is he for the free market era of a controlled economy? Does he support the quota system? What are his views on the banning of books by the Delhi and Mumbai universities? Related to these questions are more troublesome ones. Is his silence due to a disinclination to get into a firefight or is it because he does not have any views at all?
In Sonia's case, it isn't personal ambition because of warnings from her 'inner voice' so much as to permanently install the dynasty on the throne. The objective itself may not be ignoble, but some of the means she seems to prefer undoubtedly are. What is more, they are based on outdated social and economic ideas that can harm the country. Her preference, for instance, for a caste census eight decades after it was abandoned was driven by the desire to mobilise the backward castes in Congress's favofavorich carries the disturbing possibility of perpetuating the quota system with the added danger of extending it to the private sector. This fervor for 'social justice' is not the only route to economic ruin and social discord. Even more unnerving is the possible revival of a controlled economy with its emphasis on welfare measures based on high taxes. Unless Rahul dissociates himself from these regressive ideas, the great Indian middle class may reject him.
But to his credit, he has consumed absolute power with dignity. A bunch lot of small-time politicians with insignificant bases have acted violently in public life to showcase raw strength but Rahul has always remained dignified. He could have grabbed a prominent seat earlier at his selected time but he opted to learn the art of polity. Rahul Gandhi remains an unsolved puzzle for many of us in India and unless he opens up with the media for greater scrutiny, the reality about him will elude the nation.
The dark clouds of the 2G scam and the repeated evidence being given by A. Raja and others accused of his tacit involvement and other acts of omission and commission are menacingly closing in on Chidambaram. Chidambaram's note assumes significance in the light of Janata Party President Subramanian Swamy's petition in the Supreme Court saying that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) should investigate Chidambaram's role in the 2G scam. Swamy alleges that Chidambaram "fixed" spectrum rates along with Raja. The note shows that even if the two didn't collude to fix the prices, Chidambaram wanted to treat it as a "closed chapter".
He is losing his cool, and more importantly, losing his carefully clipped English accent to its more indigenous roots more often. And like his colleague Digvijay Singh, his mind seems to be disintegrating to a stage where he has started talking gibberish. Take this, for example: in reply to the BJP's demand for his resignation for his involvement in the 2G scam, Chidambaram claims that the BJP is targeting him since he initiated a probe by the NIA into Hindu terror Can any rational person see the connection between the two?
Chidambaram's special financial skills have diversified into electoral politics also. He has the distinction of having been declared defeated in the last Lok Sabha election, after which he galvanized his special skills and local machinery, in particular, a data entry operator, and doctored a marginal victory on the recount. That is quite a record of fraud. Sadly, he has to confront with hostile state government led by Amma that won the recent assembly election in his home state. And can one forget how the Indian Bank was cleaned up and left with only non-performing assets thanks to him and his Tamil Maanila buddies?
Celebrity lawyer Ram Jethmalani recently hurdled serious charges in an article stating - Being Finance Minister in the UPA government was his finest hour. He could fiddle around with share markets, capital markets, banks, financial instruments, such as securities, participatory notes, and tax treaties, not to speak of spectrum sale, and use his extraordinary innovative powers of black money magic to plunder our country with complete impunity. He assiduously cultivated the media with his clipped English accent (that led him down, now and then), occasional freebies, and sustained shadows of the Enforcement Directorate that he commanded.
On a positive note, he is unfairly criticized for his handling of home ministry but to his credit, he has performed better than his predecessor Shivraj Patil by far. The terror attacks are drastically reduced, the J&K situation looks under control, Telangana is a political issue hence he should be blamed for the mess, North East is looking fragile though manageable. We must understand that India's internal security is a huge challenge with micro-dynamic changes every hour. We have open borders with many hostile states making the internal issue more complex. But his handling of a public standoff with Pranab Mukherjee, Baba Ramdev midnight assault, Anna Hazare's unexpected arrest prior to his historic fast, booking Subramanium Swamy for an anti-minority article, open support to suspended Gujrat cop Sanjeev Bhat questions his political intelligence.
It’s time Manmohan Singh must understand that silence and inaction can be equally harmful as dishonesty.
The expression "Caesar's wife must be above suspicion," is used by Dr. Manmohan Singh while addressing the AICC session in New Delhi. Forget Caesar's wife; should the Prime Minister, like Caesar, remain silent when people like A Raja and Suresh Kalmadi run away with aam aadmi's money?
His honesty and integrity have never been on the debating table or questioned. On these grounds he has been well above the watermarks of doubt, but his silence has not been so. Dr. Singh place in Indian history is assured with a sure credit must go to late P V Narsimha Rao who gave him a chance to become the Finance Minister, the image as the 'Deng (Xiaoping) of India' - the reformer who liberated India from the shackles of the command economy and unleashed the entrepreneurial forces that transformed this ancient land.
We, the people of India, know that your integrity is beyond question. In a world and time when ethics and honesty are at a premium, we rest assured that we are led by a person who, in his moral convictions, is pure as the driven snow. This is a given. Nobody needs to tell us how.
Here are some occasions when Manmohan Singh could have acted in time, but never did:
2G SPECTRUM SCAM
It took over a year for the Prime Minister to act; it took over a year for the CBI to wake up. Had it not been for the PIL in the Supreme Court, the scam would have dragged on and on. Why did Singh not act when the then Telecom Minister A Raja refused to listen? Why did the PM not act when Raja ignored Cabinet colleagues and asked them to keep off the Spectrum turf? Why did the government not bring out the facts when the issue was debated in the Rajya Sabha over a year ago? Why did the PM act only after the Supreme Court comments on the tardy progress and questioned the CBI on its monumental silence? Another point: If the PM had nothing to hide, why not agree for a JPC probe? On the point of the demand for a JPC in the 2G scam by the Opposition, PM have castigated the Opposition for disrupting a in the 2G scam by the Opposition, PM have castigated the Opposition for disrupting a whole session of Parliament.
"One wonders what kind of politics the Opposition believes in when they do not have faith even in Parliament," he thundered. While wasting a whole session of Parliament is 'despicable', surely the Joint Parliamentary Committee or the JPC is also a tool in the hands of Parliament. Demanding a JPC is surely not unparliamentary. It has been conceded before, notably in the Bofors and the Securities scams. Why the reticence now? It's not only the Opposition, but even your own allies. Mamata Banerjee for instance, has let it be known that she would not be unhappy if the UPA accepts a JPC probe.
NIIRA RADIA TAPES
How come the Prime Minister was not aware of the fact that private conversations were being secretly taped? Such acts are allowed only for national security. Even if they were taped, who leaked it to the media and why? The conversations were taped by a government agency and the tapes were in the possession of this agency. How come the tapes were leaked and what was the motive?
The PM was visibly upset while addressing the captains of the industry this month. But that shows that he was not under control of things. Even now, he is not able to pinpoint who leaked the tapes to the media and why. Now that the content of the tapes are in public domain, what action plan is prepared by you to hunt down culprits - incidentally, all of them are high and mighty. Sir, this is a historic opportunity for you to act tough to ensure people have faith in democratic values practiced by us.
CWG SCAM
For four long months, all the dirt on Commonwealth Games was out in the open. The stink too was there for everyone to 'smell' and squirm. But for the best part, the PM adopted the three wise monkey strategy with a twist in the tale: see-no- scam, hear-no-scam, tell-no-scam. Why did the PM not step in early and stem the rot? He appointed an overseeing committee only after the mess had spun out of control. Even now, Suresh Kalmadi is talking stupid; the CBI raided his establishments after full three months of uproar in the country. Sir, we are sure that 90 days are enough to put any house in order that we expect Kalmadi must have done to destroy evidences. Surely, he plans to bid for the Olympics.
THE CVC ROW
The Central Vigilance Commissioner is appointed by taking into confidence the leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha. Three persons were shortlisted for the CVC post but the government ignored the dissenting note of Opposition leader Sushma Swaraj and appointed P J Thomas as the CVC. This despite the fact that he is an accused in the palm oil import scam in Kerala.
Sushma Swaraj had openly said that the Government was free to choose anyone among the two other officers on the list of three, not Thomas. But the PM paid a deaf ear and went ahead. The government knew all along that Thomas, as the CVC, will not be in a position to investigate the 2G spectrum allotment scandal in which his own ministry was involved. An official with such a shadow of x doubt should not have been made the CVC. Now, the matter is before the Supreme Court which has questioned the manner in which Thomas got the job. Why was the PM so keen on Thomas who was under a cloud of controversy? He could have picked up the next good officer on the list.
Well, like Caesar's wife, the PM should be above suspicion. But fact of the matter is that in all the serious corruption cases, it is Supreme Court rather than the government that is controlling the events hence leading to an impression that government has lost credibility and strength to stop the corruption and punish the guilty. The country has lost over Rs 2.5 lakh crore (over $50b) just because PM choose not to act in time.
ON FIGHT AGAINST CORRUPTION
Dr. Singh has argued that their multiple agencies investigating the various aspects of the 2G scam and therefore a JPC is unwarranted. "We have always strived to eradicate corruption and we will continue to do so. Our approach to corruption also gets clearly reflected in our actions," "These inquiries will be pursued vigorously. And it is my promise to you that no guilty person will be spared - whether he is a political leader or a government official, whichever party he may belong to and howsoever powerful he maybe."
Really, Prime Minister? "No guilty person will be spared"? Sorry to say, Prime Minister, we the citizens are not so sanguine. How many public servants have been prosecuted in Independent India for corruption? We can't think of any. And, it's nothing to do with our collective memory. We are waiting for your action plan to track down the culprits that are mentioned in Radia tapes. Therefore, if as you really say, that your "approach to corruption gets reflected in our actions", what have you done to amend the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - an Act that should actually be renamed the 'Prevention of Prosecution of Public Servants". Allow me the audacity to suggest four simple amendments to give teeth and substance to the Act and make it a real deterrent for public servants from going to the devil, now that your government has not thought of it
One: Shift onus of proof on to the public servant. If Sukh Ram or Raja or any public servant is caught with assets disproportionate to his known sources of income, make it incumbent on him or her to show that the monies or assets were earned through legitimate means. If he can't, that should be a ground for guilt and prosecution.
Two: Ensure that there will be no stays granted or adjournments in cases involving public servants. They should be ones fast-tracked with continuous hearing. Otherwise, like the case against Sukh Ram, even after a decade and a half, the culprits will have the last laugh to the bank, or wherever they have stashed the cache.
Three: Prime Minister, mere fines aren't enough for public servants who indulge in illegal gratification. Physical incarceration should be the minimum penalty for what amounts to looting the nation.
Just these three amendments to the Prevention of Corruption Act should go a long way in instilling the fear of consequences in the public servants who are tempted to reach into the national exchequer. If you claim to be acting against corruption, I wonder why your government has not even taken the first baby steps. Unfortunately, Prime Minister, the impression we get is that you are hemmed in by the allies on the one side and the moods and whims of your party and its President on the other. To her credit, Sonia Gandhi has made it known publicly that you have her full support. We wonder why the Congress party and the allies don't get the message!
We urge you to stand up and be counted. And believe me, Prime Minister, we get this sense that the people of India will be with you, whatever your party and your allies may say. It's said that the only time you acted out of conviction was on the nuclear deal with the US. The grapevine has it that you even threatened to resign; if the Congress and your UPA allies don't throw weight behind the deal in Parliament. And, Prime Minister, you know what happened. Did the heavens fall or did you get your way? Should not that be a pointer to the way you should go? And, when and if you do go that route, of playing by your convictions, and hounding out the corrupt and those who bring us shame, we have no doubt in our mind that the citizens of India, to the man, will be behind you.
Sir, this is a historic opportunity for you to act tough to ensure people have faith in democratic values practiced by us in India, you are representing aspirations of over a billion people that is one-sixth of the human population hence the responsibility is enormous. God has been kind to you for providing you with a platform to deliver extraordinary service to our nation please act!!
Coalgate investigations, FDI in retail, coordination within UPA with allies, internal security and several key policy matters have seen UPA trebling without any leadership. The highest indicator of the multi-layer power center was exposed in the passing and sudden withdrawal of an ordinance related to keeping criminals out of active politics. The cabinet headed by Dr Manmohan unanimously passed an ordinance extending certain concessions to tainted politicians. It was forwarded to the President of approval though he refused to sign. This is the start of a new story wherein Congress VP Rahul Gandhi steps in and tore apart the credibility of the government by publically stating that this ordinance is useless, and to be thrown in the dustbin, The nation has witnessed tremendous turbulence due to multi-layer power system in the government that lacks accountability with one person. Surely, the PM is the man responsible to the public at large but the world's largest democracy has seen a rare multi-level amalgamation of power to run a complex country.
UPA's multiple dysfunctions created the perfect FDI storm, the government's decision to suspend the opening up of India's retail sector to foreign investors, 12 days after it was announced with much fanfare, marks a new nadir in the fortunes of the second UPA government. Optimists and there are a few, think retail FDI could play out like the nuclear deal, where it was initially put on hold after the Left objected, and later revived.
But the second avatar of the UPA appears to be difficult from the previous one, a number of ministers in the current government said, with key players often working at cross purposes. The ministers, as well as several politicians, both belonging to the Congress and the government's allies, largely spoke on condition of anonymity. The fiasco has highlighted what was till recently only whispered about - infighting in the cabinet and a rapid diminution in the authority of the Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh. Barely 24 hours after the cabinet meeting, for instance, senior ministers from the ruling and allied parties were expressing their reservations about the move, some openly. It soon became well known, for instance, that defence minister AK Antony and rural development minister Jairam Ramesh were opposed, though neither have spoken in public.
But the discord, according to the ministers and a number of political leaders, is not restricted to the cabinet. According to a number of people familiar with the matter, equations between Sonia Gandhi, the Congress President, and the man she appointed as Prime Minister more than nine years ago, are no longer what they used to be. "The Congress is like a three-legged animal, with each being pulled in different directions. So, if there is one section that is toeing Mrs Gandhi's line, there is another that appears to have Rahul Gandhi's mandate. And a handful of people supporting the PM," a cabinet minister said.
Sonia Gandhi's illness has been a complicating factor. "Who is in charge here? Sonia Gandhi is distracted with her illness and she is no longer as hands-on as she was during UPA 1. Rahul Gandhi is a landlord in absentia his interventions are few and far between and he keeps himself away from the government mostly. That leaves the Prime Minister whom his own party members don't take too seriously. His authority is constantly challenged ironically not as much by the allies but by Congress cabinet ministers. And it doesn't help when the PMO is perceived to be playing games with various ministers," another senior UPA minister says.
"This term of the UPA has killed the spirit of doing business in India," a top industrialist. "It's not just an activist judiciary, out-of-control law enforcement agencies wherein India's premium business houses were targeted. The recent CBI FIR against Birla group and rollback reflects a poor state of governance in the country. The issues such as inflation, internal law & order situation etc have dampened the spirits of the business world. Who can do business with interest rates at 16%? This government has some outstanding, bright individuals but nobody is willing to do anything," the industrialist says.
The division in the cabinet has not helped. "The FDI in retail is a classic example of how the PM was let down by his own cabinet. Which of the powerful ministers came out in strong support? Not because in principle they didn't support it but because they are upset and disillusioned by the PM," says a minister belonging to a party allied with the Congress.
According to this person, Chidambaram feels let down by the PM as he feels the Prime Minister's Office has not been particularly helpful at a time when he is under relentless attack from Subramaniam Swamy, the maverick politician who has petitioned the courts seeking the resignation of the home minister, who was finance minister in 2008 when a set of controversial telecom licenses were issued by A Raja, the former telecom minister. A controversial note from the finance ministry, which appeared to partly blame Chidambaram for failing to prevent the scam, has not helped matters.
One cabinet minister also points out that Kapil Sibal, the telecom and HRD minister, who till a few months ago did a fair amount of firefighting for the government, kept mostly silent during the FDI debate as he feels he went out on a limb opposing the popular anti-corruption campaigner Anna Hazare with little backing from the party.
Government officials say an attempt was made by the Congress high command to bring order by appointing Pulok Chatterji as the PM's principal secretary. Chatterji comes with the formidable reputation of being a professional, low-profile and no-nonsense bureaucrat. He has an onerous task at hand, say people in the know, with the relationships between some of the most powerful cabinet ministers at an all-time low.
Landmark legislation and reforms initiated by the UPA have had one characteristic. With the important exception of the nuclear deal legislation such as NREGA - which provides 100 days of guaranteed employment - and the Food Security Bill has been personally driven by Sonia Gandhi. The government's role has been to implement the party's wishes.
In the case of multi-brand retail, it was different, with the Prime Minister driving the initiative. The government had to sell this idea to the party once the core committee took a view. Many blame industry minister Anand Sharma for the fiasco. A Congress party member says Sharma was the wrong choice to hard sell the proposal. "First, he didn't even bother to sell the idea to his party men, forget about allies. "This government is being run by Rajya Sabha people some of who haven't even been municipal commissioners," says a Congress leader sarcastically. The criticism would apply to the Prime Minister, who is a Rajya Sabha member.
Several Congress ministers say it was a classic case of a bad presentation. "The policy should have been pitched as a special power that states were going to be given to avail foreign investment in infrastructure and retail if it so desired. As India gradually inches for the General Elections 2014 with massive rallies and election fever already set in the country, the stakes are higher than ever. It is a battle of Narender Modi-led BJP minus NDA to secure 200+ Lok Sabha seats in order to attract allies to form the government. It is true that Narender Modi is the most popular leader of the country today but the limitation of BJP is that it will contest national elections in 2/3 of India wherein it is having absolutely no presence in 1/3 of India hence success ratio required to translate 2/3 seats is extremely high, it makes Narender Modi task very difficult. On the other hand, Rahul Gandhi must have to demonstrate extreme control over the party to settle himself as the undisputed leader. He must deliver goods through words and actions. India loves authoritative leadership so Rahul Gandhi has limited options. He will be fighting against the history of ten years of anti-incumbency of the UPA government. There is a generation shift within Congress leadership so the experience leaders may feel ignored by the young brigade; the balancing may require huge skills for Rahul Gandhi. Finally, he must take control of the party and government decisively to disseminate message to the country that he is in complete control of the entire governance and he is the BOSS. It will give Congress cadre a clear line of control and it will offer the country a clear option to vote or not vote for the Rahul Gandhi-led Congress party for UPA III.
By Prashant Tewari
FREE Download
OPINION EXPRESS MAGAZINE
Offer of the Month