Debate or driving a wedge?

This post originally appeared here.

That our TV and newspaper debates have become didactic is increasingly apparent. But are they without any purpose? Without any motive? Why do opinion makers feel compelled to lead people in a certain direction? And does this direction lead people to a certain political choice while steering them away from others? The answer can be found in what transpires in these debates.

Baba Ramdev started a campaign against corruption. This campaign gathered so much momentum that the government sent four union ministers to meet the Baba. Things did not go as the government had hoped. The Baba’s campaign acquired a deeply Saffron character. Soon after that we heard TV studios sing in chorus disparaging the Baba and his campaign. We saw TV studio invitees echoing exactly the same thoughts as that of the anchors who themselves echoed thoughts of the government. Switch to a debate in another TV studio and one could not help but think one was hearing an echo of the debate in the other TV studio. This was in sharp contrast with the almost approving nod Anna Hazare’s campaign received. The difference between the two was that Anna’s campaign was strictly “apolitical” while Baba’s was “political” and not just “political” but “Saffron” too.

Take a more recent example. The Karnataka Lokayukta came out with a report on mining scams. Yeddyurappa of BJP was the Chief Minister heading a majority government. Congress and JDS are the political opposition. Yeddyurappa and his family find mention in the report and every TV studio asked for his ouster. Yeddyurappa resigned. A similar thing happened in Delhi. Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit of the Congress party has a more serious involvement in the Commonwealth Games corruption. The Shunglu Committee and CAG reports have listed the scam in detail and questioned her role in the same. An equivalent level of campaign for her ouster is nowhere to be seen in TV studios or newspaper columns. The reaction has been disproportionately muted. It was said that the BJP would strengthen its moral standing against corruption by making Yeddyurappa resign. Now we hear the CAG had exceeded its mandate in indicting Sheila Dikshit and that its findings are not final but must be put under scrutiny.

These are but two recent and more popular examples. Scores such examples can be witnessed if one go through most of our debates. The resulting narrative of such debates disadvantages a certain political formation and by default this benefits the grand old political formation. The political formation at advantage has been given the highly desirable character of being secular. With secularism being spoken of favourably and rewarded in TV studios and columns, parties associating themselves with secularism enjoy good word of mouth.

With such debates it becomes difficult for anyone to put the favourable political formation under scrutiny and not attract criticism. The result of such debates is to drive a wedge between the fence sitters and political formations not identified with secularism. Such debates consolidate the committed and make it difficult, almost impossible for the uncommitted to choose anything but the secular choice.

Tangential journalism

You would think that when a political party assumes power promising inclusive growth with a human face and fails miserably to do so, the media would hold those failing their promises accountable. You would think the media would ask tough questions and demand explanation of the party’s leadership for its failures. But apparently that is not the right way to think. Instead we are lead to believe the entire political class is a failure. The ruling party could not be held accountable because, again, all politicians are bad. What are we to do in such a situation? Apparently we must watch prime time TV news shows disparaging all politicians. We must light candles at national monuments to show our disgust. We must write lengthy columns expressing similar sentiment. But what we must absolutely not do is politicize any issue in an electoral democracy. We must not encourage people to be more aware politically and urge them to participate in the electoral process. This logic is at play in large, influential sections of our mainstream media.

Every time there is a raging issue confronting the nation we find our newsmen asking exactly the wrong questions. Rather than question the ruling party for their failures, political opponents are pitted against each other and we are expected to watch this believing this is serious debate. These scenes are repeated with unfailing regularity each day. A typical scene involves a newsman posing cagey questions to a member from the ruling party. The ruling party member promptly shifts goalposts to the opposite end without losing any time and the opposition party member is left defending himself.

This script works very well in a wide range of situations. It is a template that fits everything. Take terrorism for example. The perpetrators of terror harbor no illusions on what and why they are doing. They are quite upfront and candid about it. But it would be unsecular and inhumane of investigating authorities to carry out any profiling, to carry out any serious investigation simply because it involves a disproportionately large number from a certain religion. It is only a minor inconvenience that perpetrators of terror happen to be in disproportionately large numbers from a certain religion. But prime time TV newsmen tell us it is abominable to carry out logical investigation and that we must feel guilty for doing so. To drive home this point shows are conducted posing such existential questions as “are we unfairly targeting minorities?” or “has the majority failed the minority?”.

Lets take corruption. That the issue has hit the roof is an understatement. And again here a certain political party has a disproportionately large share in it. Now see the questions being posed by our newsmen. See the pattern?

But it should not surprise anyone who has observed the media and our homegrown opinion makers. Over the years a convenient equation has been bandied about. A certain political party by the virtue of a certain type of characters being at the helm are automatically secular. Something very desirable, something young people should aspire for we are led to believe. And then of course what is left is very undesirable. A certain other political party naturally falls in this category. A very communal party, highly undesirable trait, we are told. Now when you have your very desirable, very secular political characters getting caught in seriously compromising cases it becomes well nigh impossible to criticize them squarely having cheered such characters for decades. Thankfully we have the other undesirable party to direct all the public anger at. So we have this strange situation where the secular party - in face of never-before-seen-in-history mismanagement - claim the moral high ground and question the communal party for its failure to check all ills while it was briefly in power. While all this happens almost none on the media puts things straight.

One cannot help but notice that most of our star journalists seem to consistently miss hitting the mark. Instead our media is a willful facilitator helpfully taking viewers and readers on the tangent lest logical questions be asked leading to obvious, inconvenient answers.

Greetings to Gujarat on Swarnim Jayanti

Warm greetings to Gujarat on Swarnim Jayanti. Congratulations to Narendra Modi on bringing about change in Gujarat and taking it to the top in development. Best wishes to the people and CM Narendra Modi for the future.

About Swarnim Gujarat.

Some thoughts on elections-2009

The seculars have defeated the communals. The people's verdict must be respected and the Congress party must be congratulated. While the secular cheerleaders are in rapture, the communal folks seem to be completely disheartened by their inability to win a mandate. Varied reasons are being put forward by one and all for the lesser than expected results for the communals. Some are even resorting to conspiracy theories. But the true ones will only be apparent when a thorough analysis is carried out.

Random listing of my thoughts below -

1. The communals were ineffective in taking their message to the masses.

2. In debates, they let the focus shift away from their message and got tricked into defending themselves against various allegations.

3. The communals were playing by the rules set by their opponents, were never able to turn the tables on the seculars.

4. Party spokespersons were similarly ineffective.

5. Never countered any myth spread by the secular media allowing the urban youth to be drawn away from the communals.

6. Ran a negative campaign and were unable to defend when faced with inconvenient questions.

7. Allowed the media to keep focus on communal issues rather than highlight their development manifesto.

8. Support from RSS and other organisations does not seem wholehearted.

9. Infighting hurt the communals in quite a few constituencies.

10. Strayed away from their core beliefs and distanced their core support base.

11. Bending over backwards to seek the secular approval repudiating the very beliefs that helped them rise to national prominence.

12. Unable to expand their support base beyond their strongholds.

13. Content with playing second fiddle to coalition partners.

The communals should not fall for the trap being set for them by the secular opinion makers who are now urging them to reinvent and adopt a "center right" approach. Not for nothing did they win a series of elections in the last couple of years and were able to retain strongholds. Instead any reinvention must be on the lines of falling back to their roots, regain the core support base back, gain ground in more states and look after the interests of the support base by not reneging on promises. The communals must strengthen themselves and refrain from seeking the secular approval. Koenraad Elst has analysed the communal failure to capture power -

Right-wing parties all over the world have a common trait:
Once in or near power, they betray their own support base. The BJP is no
different. It is needlessly described as a ‘Hindu chauvinist’ party which it is
not. To prove its ‘secular’ credentials, the BJP chose to become the ‘B’ team of
the Congress. And was rejected by the voters

Do read it in full here.

Election histrionicses

With the growing number if television news channels, in addition to the print media, this election season seems to have got a lot of exposure. The quality, though, is sub par. However the exposure has brought on record things we already knew happened.

Hours before the elections, police on
Wednesday seized more than Rs 15 lakh cash including Rs 2.80 lakh from an MIM
leader who was distributing money to voters in his house at Toli Chowki. A Praja
Rajyam Party candidate was also arrested for violation of the model code of
conduct.

[...] Police arrested Moinuddin and
recovered Rs 2.80 lakh cash from the house.

In another instance, Cyberabad police
recovered Rs 1.80 lakh from a former TDP Councillor who made a vain attempt to
avoid being caught by fleeing in an RTC bus.

[...] Police recovered Rs 1.80 lakh with
him. [more here]

If only these cashlords had dispensed half their duties, they wouldn't need to be doing this. Now, they lost their money and their face. Besides, voters have gotten smarter. They realise most have failed them, so they'd rather take the money when it's raining and vote whoever they deem fit.

[...] Voters often take money from many parties and finally vote
for the one they support. [Link]

Even as the media scrutiny has helped expose malpractices, the debate leaves a lot to be desired. The primary debate during elections ought be on the incumbent government's performance. None of the prominent media houses cared for an audit on the UPA's governance. Instead we had them parroting the same talking points presented by the various UPA members. What we have witnessed on TVs these last few weeks is the same old "secularism" vs "communalism" debate.

Every such debate is futile because it is an diversion from real issues and more importantly, neither "secularism" nor "communalism" is clearly defined. Even before it's proved, it is readily accepted "communalism" is evil and "secularism" is noble. And the media has made it more than clear, BJP is communal and Congress is secular. That tilts the scales heavily in favour of the "secular" parties even before any debate.

The television debates are also ineffectual for another reason. Participants almost never stay on issues being discussed. Instead any question or issue raised is sought to be diverted so opponent bashing can be carried out rather than answer one's own performance. So, for instance, when faced with a question on terrorism, we have the Congress slamming the BJP by questioning attacks during the NDA regime rather than explain it's own failure. The BJP too is incapable of articulating its criticism of the UPA effectively and demolishing canards about its record. Similar is the case for every other issue. No party can see its mistakes. Every debate is reduced to faulting the other than staying on message.

Another quite intriguing aspect of the media is the slant and bias in its reporting. If you were to scan the election coverage news, you'll notice the favourable, indeed fan like, coverage given to the Gandhi dynasty. It seems the dynasty is beyond scrutiny and the Nehru-Gandhi progeny can never do any wrong and the divine powers have ordained them to rule our nation. The favour is also extended to the Congress party. Contrast that with the unfavourable coverage given to the "communal" parties and anyone who's opposed to the "secular forces".

The "voice of the people" media has failed miserably in holding the UPA accountable. While the UPA goes about faulting the NDA's record, it never cares to explain it's own failure in correcting them. After all it has been in power for the past 5 years, enough opportunity to correct the alleged mistakes.

Teesta's falsehoods exposed

The NGO Citizens for Justice and Peace, headed by Teesta Setalvad, has been doing exactly the opposite of what its name suggests. It has made every attempt to deny justice and derail peace in Gujarat with its concocted theories of "Hindu atrocity" on "Muslim minority". It is now clear that facts are contrary to Teesta's claims. The SIT investigating the Gujarat riots 2002 case has this observation -

The Special Investigation Team
responsible for the arrests of those accused in Gujarat riots has severely
censured NGOs and social activist Teesta Setalvad who campaigned for the riot
victims. [Link]

Here's the SIT noting Teesta's fabrications -

Many incidents of killings and violence
were cooked up, false charges were levelled against then police chief P C Pandey
and false witnesses were tutored to give evidence about imaginary incidents, the
SIT said in a report submitted before a Bench comprising Justices Arijit
Pasayat, P Sathasivam and Aftab Alam. [Link]

And here are a few stories cooked by an imaginative Teesta to guarantee maximum publicity -

The SIT also found no truth in the
following incidents widely publicised by the NGOs:

* A pregnant Muslim woman Kausar Banu was
gangraped by a mob, who then gouged out the foetus with sharp weapons

* Dumping of dead bodies into a well by
rioteers at Naroda Patiya

* Police botching up investigation into
the killing of British nationals, who were on a visit to Gujarat and
unfortunately got caught in the riots Rohtagi said: "On a reading of the report,
it is clear that horrendous allegations made by the NGOs were false. Stereotyped
affidavits were supplied by a social activist and the allegations made in them
were found untrue." [Link]

Teesta Setalvad and her "secular" cohorts have made a career out of their false stories on the Gujarat riots. The SIT's findings will now leave Teesta and her ilk jobless.

Next to Teesta, the media shares the most responsibility for spreading the canards by her and making them part of the popular folklore. The time and publicity given to the false cases from a cahoot media and repeated falsehoods have prejudiced a great number for minds against the BJP and Narendra Modi in particular. The eagerness shown by every "secular" champion to pass an judgement even before the legal proceedings reached their conclusions betrayed their prejudices.

The myopic "secular" eyes fail to see that the Muslims are probably the most prosperous in Gujarat than anywhere else in the country. Various reports indicate that the per capita income amongst Muslims is the highest in Gujarat. Besides various Muslim individuals and organisations have come out in support of Narendra Modi in appreciation of his governance and progress brought about in the state. Such facts are blacked out precisely because they are inconvenient to the "secular" belief.

The alacrity shown by the media to ignore facts, jump the gun, pass judgements and prejudice the people's minds is appalling. It is time that the "secular" cheerleaders stop perpetuating these myths about Gujarat. The various awards granted to Teesta must be revoked and every media house that aligned with her must come clean.

You can read more about Teestas falsehoods here, here, here, here and here.

A whole lotta noise, very less news

News reporting is fast becoming extinct. Instead slanted reporting peppered with liberal doses of personal views is now the norm. Political correctness demands conformity to the "secular" construct.

Shrieking opinion manufacturers raise enough din to drowns out real issues. Karnataka seems to be getting an awful lot of attention lately. It seems the "saffron brigade" breaching the south, much to the chagrin of the "seculars" predicting a Congress majority, has something to do with this. If one were to go by the reporting on Karnataka in the mainstream news media, one would think all troubles started only after the BJP came to power. A saffron connection is sought in every incident in the state. The alacrity shown in dragging the entire Sangh Parivar into controversy is sharply contrasted with the complete silence when facts turn inconvenient.

Any mischief involving anyone else but the "communal" folks is given a miss. Matters of grave importance such as illegal occupation of temples and historical structures, the growing threat of home grown terrorism, unscrupulous churches etc. are deemed unworthy of "secular" attention. Similarly, the serious threat to national security posed by unchecked Bangaldeshi infiltration, their aggression towards local people and take over of local lands, Churches dictating politics in the North East, foreigners becoming MPs are either only mentioned in passing or met with silence.

The Varun Gandhi incident is a good example of "secular" noise winning over issues. The BJP candidate made some serious claims during his alleged "hate speeches" in his constituency. His claims included molestation of underage girls, mass slaughter of cows, an unfair local administration. These are serious enough issues not to be sidelined. Yet no media house seems to have invested any time in verifying and unearthing the issues. The whole "hate speech" saga began after a convenient 10 to 11 days after the "communal" Gandhi said something "unsecular".

The Election Commission seems to have fallen for the "secular" trap in reaching to its conclusion. Apparently, it seems unwilling to go through the rigours of justice. It formed an opinion without verifying the allegations and without giving a fair hearing to the matter. However the Kidwais of the Congress seem to get away with their blatantly communal meeting with Muslim voters. This, perhaps, is a precursor to things under Naveen Chawla.

Chawla must go

The 'secular' voices in the media are unnecessarily trying to create a controversy over the Navin Chawla issue. This case is a reminder of how, once again, the media is trying to obfuscate reality by drumming up a cacophony of sounds based on flimsy grounds.

A simple look at facts ought to make the matter crystal clear. However, the media, which should set the right tone of public discourse, is failing miserably at it. And not for the first time either. All the scepticism seems to originate from the 'timing' of the CEC's recommendation to oust Chawla. A pretty feeble argument considering the damning facts against the conduct of Chawla.

Navin Chawla has a long history of questionable conduct. His integrity has been suspect since about 1979 (3 decades ago) when he was Secretary to the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi. And a commission under Justice Shah had this to say -

Chawla is “unfit to hold any public office which
demands an attitude of fair play and consideration for others”.

And what were the reasons for this conclusion?

..for “authoritarian and callous” conduct and gross misuse
of power “in cynical disregard of the welfare of citizens”.

A man of integrity would hardly be described thus. Yet a couple of decades later Chawla sets up a trust, headed by his wife and seeks funds from the Congress folks viz. A A Khan, R P Goenka, Ambika Soni, Karan Singh and A R Kidwai. It would be interesting to see if this did not play any part in his being appointed as an Election Commisioner (EC).

Lacking completely in the ability to introspect, this incorrigible man continues his dubious ways even when serving as the EC, which requires a non-partisan conduct. The current Chief Election Commissioner N Gopalaswami has detailed out his blatantly partisan behaviour in his submissions to the President which includes more damning details -

Rajashri Bhattacharya, a 1979 batch IAS officer of the Andhra cadre, had even
complained to the Cabinet Secretary that Chawla had abused him and threatened to get him
arrested. Bhattacharya has since moved to the Planning
Commission. R Balasubramanian, an Orissa cadre IAS officer, is the other deputy election
commissioner who complained to the CEC in writing against Chawla.

Besides his far from ideal functioning during the Uttar Pradesh (UP), Gujarat and Himachal Pradesh (HP) pools too have been questioned in the CEC's report to the President.

As for questioning the 'timing' of the CEC's recommendation against Chawla, a look at facts, rather than seeking motivated 'expert' opinions, would reveal that the circumstances were not entirely in the CECs hands. Chawla has more then his share in causing the delay.

And if there are any questions about him being a Congress stooge, this should make it clear -

In the report to the President, the CEC notes that whenever
the full bench meeting was seized of an issue, Chawla will make an excuse of going to the washroom.
And soon thereafter, invariably, the CEC would get phone calls from top Congress
functionaries even as the meeting was in progress. This amounted to interference
in the functioning of the Election Commission, the CEC felt.

He even tried to protect Sonia Gandhi -

In his report, Gopalaswami also elaborated on the visit of the
prime minister's Principal Secretary T K A Nair to Nirvachan Sadan, which houses the
Election Commission of India in New Delhi, to enquire about the 'notice' being
sent to Congress president Sonia Gandhi on her receiving an award from
Belgium.

With such a mountain of inconvenient facts against Chawla, the 'secular' voices are left to question the motive and the timing rather than the substance. Filter all this noise and it will be clear that there is no case to defend him. Chawla simply must go.

You know where this is headed, don't you?

Establish terror links to the Hindus anywhich way, then equate the RSS with SIMI, then ban the RSS, next BJP and finally all Hindus. That Congress's social justice for you.

Karan Thapar the un-intellectual

Mr. Arun Jaitley was the recent guest on Mr. Karan Thapar’s ‘Devil’s Advocate’. This particular debate is a good example of how self styled ‘secular’ journalists fare when faced with a worthy opponent.

Mr. Thapar brought out the issue of economic blockade of Kashmir –

Figures released by the Jammu and Kashmir horticultural department, which is a
part of the official government, prove that between the first of August and the
17th of August this year, only 890 trucks bearing fruit came from Srinagar to
the Banihal pass where as last year during the same dates, the figure was
2,148—a fall of nearly sixty per cent.

Mr. Jaitley countered this claim as a mere propaganda by the separatists in the valley with no real basis to it –

Let’s be very clear. If there is a bandh and a curfew in Jammu for 50 days, if
you have a curfew in the Valley for 30 days plus, business is bound to go
down.

To support his claim he quoted this –

We asked the Army and the district administration as to what is the position.
They gave us the daily figures. This was not the apple season.
They said, we
have nothing lying in the stocks and today we have 90 trucks waiting at the
sabzi mandis, and there is nothing to be loaded on it. It was a false
propaganda.

Mr. Thapar had similar questions of shortage of medicines in the valley which were countered effectively by Mr. Jaitley by referring to clarifications by the relevant officials and the army who denied charges of economic blockade and attributed the fall in traffic and business to the bandh and curfew in the state –

The Army’s position is that there is no blockade; the
government’s position is that there is no blockade and the Sanghash Samiti told
us that there never was a blockade and there won’t be a blockade.

But that did not satisfy Mr. Thapar, he kept repeating that there in fact was a bandh in the valley and that the BJP was exacerbating the situation. Apparently Mr. Thapar seems to hold the separatist’s claims in high regard and not believe the state officials or the army or even the union government that denied any economic blockade in the valley. Not surprising when you cite your sources as ‘The Indian Express’ or ‘The Times of India’ who themselves cite only the separatists and have total disregard for any official that denied such claims.

Now, agreed that he was playing the devil’s advocate, but Mr. Thapar was not being responsible in quoting such luminaries (sic) as Mobin Shah, the president of the Kashmir Chamber of Commerce (who incidentally is a part of the Hurriat), the information secretary of the Lashkar-e-Taiyyaba (really? The LeT Mr. Thapar?). And if indeed he was serious about debating the issue, he would not have restricted it to supporting the separatist’s claims, but would have talked about what really is at the core. But that may be uncomfortable for Mr. Thapar and the others, when they seek to legitimise the separatists. Hearts that bleed for the Jihadists and separatists do not care about it. Mr. Jaitley got it exactly right when he said –

As far as Jammu is concerned, it is crying due to
discrimination and this is a strong ground of discrimination and you want to
shut a popular debate out on this discrimination?

But when you suffer from myopia all you can see is the evil ‘communal forces’ (which comprises of only the BJP and the sangh parivar and no Muslim, Jihadi group) and you have to bring them down. Mr. Thapar gets it completely wrong when he said –

It is not a popular debate. It is that BJP deliberately
exploiting a political situation to gain electoral benefits.

Our leaders must act, our people must make them do so

Our cities continue to be bombed and all we get is banal responses to the incidences from our leaders. The attacks were (and they continue) highly disturbing and could affect the moral of the people. The unmitigated disaster of a Home Minister, Mr. Shivraj Patil, was not even innovative with his remarks. The same words spoken as after every such incident, tossed and rearranged so they do not sound repetitive. The Prime Minister, Dr. Manmohan Singh has been equally disappointing. But we have now come to expect this after having known them for these past four years. What else was new in their reactions to the recent bomb blasts in Bangalore and Ahmedabad?

The dust had not yet settled from the blasts and we had the two main political parties sparring already, each trying to gain as much political mileage as it possibly could. First up, it was the UPA, headed by Congress that tried to exonerate itself by claiming it had warned the Karnataka government of a possible terror attack. Next we had the BJP claiming that the Congress is deliberately trying to go slow on the terrorists by not bringing back POTA. The BJP has a good point here since a tough anti-terror law would empower security agencies to act strongly and bring results to their investigations. However the latest allegation by Ms. Sushma Swaraj is far fetched even by conspiracy theory standards. The Congress will use it to discredit the BJP. This task will be easier since the Congress has immense clout in the mainstream media. The verbal war has the potential to divert attention from what is necessary. Some Congress leaders demand Mr. Modi's ouster, by the same logic, Mr. Shivraj Patil should be the first to go since terrorism has flourished during his tenure.

The Congress’ response has been typical, careful not to disturb its votes. The dogged refusal to act tough on terror even after bombings in two cities on two successive days in indicative of where their interests lie, national security is clearly not one of them. Add to that its handling of the Bangaldeshi refugees, border disputes with our neighbors, the Naxal and Maoist violence and nothing more would be needed to prove this. Congress leaders, especially the Prime Minister no less, claim that POTA never stopped terror attacks from taking place. However, that does not stop them from claiming that the present penal codes are enough in tackling terror. Clearly the penal codes are inadequate too. Another idea suggested by Dr. Singh is forming a federal agency to handle terrorism. Well, that too would not stop attacks unless it is armed to the teeth with tough anti-terror laws with less political interference into its functioning.

However, it is not all depressing. The police and emergency service response in Bangalore was very quick and effective in keeping the situation under control. There definitely is a marked difference in the way the state machinery worked during the Deve Gowda days and now. Similarly, the services in Gujarat following the tragic events have been praiseworthy. Mr. Narendra Modi was quick to respond to the situation and did not allow the situation to grow into anything unfortunate. The response of the leaders of the two states has also been praiseworthy. Both seem determined to deal with the situation without diverting their attentions to anything else. That is a good sign.

The center, especially the UPA rather the Congress, does not have the political will to deal with internal security matter strongly. This is even more pronounced since their vote base seems to have eroded greatly due to high inflation and the recent events involving the trust vote in the parliament. It does not want to disturb its traditional vote base lest it gets completely wiped out. It is the people who must refuse such banal responses from the Home Minister and our Prime Minister and demand action from them. It is time words replaced actions.

Update: My earlier thoughts about Ms. Sushma Swaraj's allegations were incorrect. I now believe she may not be entirely incorrect. Knowing Congress' dubious history and its ability to be involved into many a controversy, it is perfectly capable for anything. Besides, Ms. Swaraj did not name the Congress explicitly, so why are the Congressmen cursing her? Was it not a party to such grave allegations as the BJP being behind the attack on our parliament, Godhara etc? Any who can forget the unfounded allegations such as "Merchant of death" which our "secular" media furthered willing knowing fully well that it was a flase and grave charge aimed at vilification.

What's the deal here?

The Indo-US nuclear deal is a convenient reason for the Congress to distance itself from the nagging Left. Neither the Congress nor Dr. Singh is serious about the deal. All the latest events are a ploy to divert the nation’s attention from other serious issues like price rise, internal security, Chinese aggression etc. It is clear that the Congress and the UPA are on the defensive on these subjects. So the deal gives them something to divert our attention with. That it is a ploy should be clear from the fact that the Left (consistent and principled politics? BAH!) now finds Dr. Singh the villain in the act rather than the Congress. (Trying to keep our options open, are we Karat?)

On the other hand, this whole saga could really be fallout. Dr. Singh, who continually exhorted on building a broad consensus on the deal in India, declares he is going ahead with the next steps towards the deal without taking the nation into confidence. So much for being our nations’ Prime Minister! No concerns for “broad consensus” now? And the hesitation in sharing the text for the IAEA drafts claiming they were classified when the whole world could read it over the internet was simply ridiculous. It makes one question Dr. Singh’s loyalty to the nation. No wonder Shri. L K Advani wonders if something else is at play here.

And just how serious is Dr. Singh about this deal? If he indeed was serious enough, he would not have waited this late in trying to get the deal signed. He chose to wait hoping he would get the Left parties to agree to it and long enough until he could count on someone else for support. Surely he knew that the Left would never agree to such a deal.

Dr. Singh did not take the parliament into confidence, there is little consensus over it, the public is ill informed about the deal, the media is hard at work in trying to sell the deal on behalf of the Congress with it’s biased coverage, all these should be reasons enough for doubt. However, and all of a sudden, the Congress finding new best friends in arch rivals, Mulayam and Amar Singh should be a giveaway about dubiousness of this mess of a deal.

Congress not with the "aam aadmi"

"Congress ka haath, aam aadmi ke saath" - that slogan is proven false when you read this. For all it's pro-aam aadmi proclamations, most of the Congress ruled states are behind the BJP ruled states in implementing NREGS (a Congress brain child). Which also indicates the amount of corruption in the Congress. Where does all the money meant for the poor go is not exactly a secret now.

Congress cares for the "aam aadmi" only during the elections (not a new discovery BTW).

An affirmative action that's no lip service

In a walk-the-talk instance, the BJP has adopted 500 farmers in the Vidarbha region of Maharashtra. This is good news. The BJP, in doing so, shows that it is serious about such issues & is focused on development for the people. This place had been in the news all for wrong reasons.

This indeed may be the first instance a political party in India has taken such a step, rather than lending lip service. It has done this to highlight the failures of the UPA government, which have been many. One may argue that the BJP may be doing this with an eye on the general elections, however, when you consider that it is actually going to adopt these farmers & not drum up assurances or make mere promises, it is a sign of it’s seriousness & commitment.

In view of such measures, the UPA government’s (especially Dr. Singh & Sonia’s) assurances look like hollow promises. It assumed power by it’s much publicized agenda for the ‘aam aadmi’ & governance with a human touch. After 4 years, it has little to show towards that.

Dr. Singh visited Vidarbha when the suicides were at their peak & it marked assurances for help from him. But what followed were little help & more suicides. Maharashtra has it’s very own strongman, Sharad Pawar, as the Union Cabinet Minister for Agriculture. But, that hasn’t helped either. His multi-crore BCCI duties keep him busy leaving little time to carry out his ministerial obligations. One would think, the leaders we elect to serve us would do what their duty demands of them, but this is not to be.

Dr. Singh himself has been guilty of not delivering on his promises. The ‘aam aadmi’ continues to be ‘aam’ even after 4 years of his premiership. His involvement with Project Tiger has failed to yeild results. His government continues with minority appeasement, caste & now religion based reservations. He has failed to act tough on terrorism. The non-Congress ruled states have accused UPA leadership of not aiding them enough.

But, the BJP does not get it right everywhere. It has to get all the leaders to understand it’s agenda & set an example by providing good governance in the states it is in power using it’s Gujarat experience. It needs to continue on it’s development agenda & set a benchmark for Indian politics. This will lead to a positive cycle in India, when the people will expect more of the good from governments & be intolerant to non-performers. This will go a long way in earning people’s trust. In doing so, it will really be a party with difference.

Karnataka BJP gets it wrong

BJP is in poll gear in Karnataka. It is making popular promises to gain power. While the Gujarat power model was much appreciated, the BJP does not seem to have learnt anything from there. This is not the first time any party has made such a populist promise. We've had Congress make such promises many times in the past. AP is an example. The BJP-Shiv Sena coalition in Maharashtra did that before along with other states like TN. We've seen that such promises aren't easy to keep.

This is a retrograde move by BJP. It will surely put strain on the state in keeping this promise. The state leadership is shortsighted & cannot see anything beyond seeking power. The announcement seems to have been made keeping mind BESCOM's recent performance. How far will this be sustainable remains debatable.

This will no doubt be abused by rich farmers thus benefiting them more than the poor farmer. Instead the governments should be focusing on curbing losses by stopping electricity theft, recollecting past dues, regulating meters etc. While some steps in the right direction are being taken, this latest announcement is not. It may undo all the recent good by straining the finances. Besides, where will the money come from? Of course the tax payers. It is time that we people started holding our leaders accountable for our money & took part in the process. It's our state/country after all. Once the electricity board is under financial burden, talks of privatisation will begin.

The states should be working towards the larger interests of the nation. Distributing free power is not such a thing. Karnataka needs strong local leadership that will take it forward towards prosperity. Most of the leaders have sought to exploit the development in Bangalore & do little more. Former PM H. D. Devegowda's party was in power & he had a chance to serve his home state. But sadly, like we have all seen, his greed has cost the people of Karnataka much rather than benefiting from him. Let's hope that Karnataka finds some strong leaders with foresight that keep the interests of the people (along with the nation) in mind & give them a progressive, stable government.