Bihar poised for battle of ballots

So, what emerges from the BJP is this: the party continues to develop cold feet in finding a face other than the magical Narendra Modi. We saw this in Mahararashtra and also in Haryana where they projected the prime minister as the chief minister’s patron and succeeded in getting people’s mandate. But, that they could not find a face from Maharashtra BJP also remains a damning fact though there were so many leaders within the party in the state.

In Delhi we saw the opposite. They had won all the seven parliamentary constituencies in Delhi, though several voters, who actually got them elected can’t recognise them all by face. In the assembly polls, the BJP could not find a face that could be projected and rallied around. They parachuted a former IPS officer who had rubbed shoulder with the incumbent chief minister of Delhi. And, it turned out to be a classic case of how to lose an election.

Now, the stage is set for Bihar assembly polls, which would be held in September-October. BJP under Narendra Modi-Amit Shah combination looks formidable despite losing Delhi Darbar. The opposition knows this quite well. And, this explains why Lalu Prasad Yadav forgave his tormentor Nitish Kumar and not only joined hands but accepted his leadership. Lalu Prasad’s statement that he “is ready to drink every poison to defeat communal forces of BJP” tells how an astute political mind from the opposition rank reads Modi-Shah combination.

Lalu is a political outcast at the moment, can’t contest polls, therefore can’t be as effective as he could have been. Lalu understands that Bihar has changed a lot in the last one decade. Youth are no longer craving for caste pride. They are aspiring, dreaming of living life king size. Mobile phone internet has changed the mindset of the youth, who are the biggest force in the state. So, he recognises the threat that Modi would pose when he would sell dreams to the teeming millions of Bihar.

Narendra Modi’s rise in BJP ranks means that the myths of caste barriers are also being broken in Bihar. Modi’s presence neutralises BJP’s forward caste image and also Nitish’s now defunct social engineering of Mahadalit, who sensed their recognition in the chief minister’s theory but in Modi, they sense fructification of their aspiration, ambition and also liberation.

The last few polls in Bihar have seen the traditional voting pattern being breached. Yadava’s support for RJD has been declining. Kurmi-Koeri support for JDU is also showing signs of drift. Mahadalits have understood their electoral worth and are not blind voters this time around. Congress’ organizational weakness means that the upper caste voters would tend to align with the BJP, who have unwavering support of the traders, the Baniyas. 

It means that almost 17% of Muslims could be vital and decisive for Bihar after at least two assembly polls. This is why Modi-bashing is attaining high pitch in Bihar and TV studios. And, on the counter-hand, we saw the prime minister reading a verse from Quran to underline the significance of knowledge.

There are several other factors in Bihar this time around. The Manjhis and the Pappus are potential spoilsports. Jitan Ram Manjhi is certainly bound to pull a sizeable portion of Mahadalits from the JDU’s shelter to saffron camp by playing victim card. Pappu Yadav with his new party can play a bigger role in Kosi belt and among Yadavas. Manjhi may be a factor in central-south Bihar in about 20 assembly segments while Pappu Yadav may affect results in about 70 assembly seats of Kosi-Mithilanchal belt.

So, Bihar is going to be an interesting battle of ballots once again. BJP could do well if it can slay its own demon of one-up-man-ship in the party and that too in time. Though, signs are not good with SuMo rejecting party’s state in-charge Ananth Kumar’s proposition that NaMo would be the face for assembly polls. JDU-RJD combo is banking heavily on this very divisive factor associated with Narendra Modi, to stage an electoral coup in a state where they have been ruling for more than two decades and a half.

Manjhi hots up Bihar politics; test for Modi-Shah combo

Politics in Bihar has taken a curious turn with the JDU expelling Chief Minister Jeetan Ram Manjhi from the party while the resurgent leader has dug in his heels. He has refused to throw towel as easily as the Nitish-Sharad-Lalu axis would have thought.

This is perhaps the only instance of a Chief Minister being expelled for refusing to step down despite clear instruction of the party. The Speaker has accepted Nitish Kumar as the floor leader of the JDU, which is the ruling party and Nitish camp has claimed support of more number than required for majority. So, Manjhi can technically be rejected as an eligible member of the Bihar Assembly by the Speaker and hence loses the ground to remain as the chief minister of the state.

But, constitutionally, Manjhi is still the chief minister. The Constitution does not recognize party as the basis of executive/government or even legislature for that matter. Elections are fought along party lines in accordance with the Representation of the People's Act and conducted by the Election Commission but that is the end of statutory role of party in the Constitutional scheme of governance in India.

So, clearly here surfaces a dichotomy vis a vis the political scenario of Bihar. The Speaker would not recognize the Chief Minister, who may be recognized by the Governor because the person holding the office of the Chief Minister has not quit. The Chief Minister can be removed only through a floor test if he is not quitting on his own. This also means the political ball of Bihar is in the court of Governor, Kesari Nath Tripathi who, obviously is not an institution only but a political persona as well.

The options before the Governor are here as under:

1. Ask Manjhi to go for a floor test
2. Dissolve the assembly on the recommendation of Manjhi on the back of having been authorized by his cabinet or the majority of his cabinet to do so; but if the Governor has doubts about Manjhi enjoying confidence of majority, he may not act on the recommendation of Manjhi
3. Appoint Nitish Kumar, who has staked claim to form a new government, but the Governor can only do so after Manjhi fails to prove majority in the floor test
4. Impose President's Rule and dissolve the assembly
5. Impose President's Rule and keep the assembly in suspended animation as its tenure still has some 8-9 months left.

Here the Governor can play the role of a king maker. But, his role would largely depend on the mood of the central leadership of the BJP. The BJP leadership would be in a catch-22 situation. It can not go with Manjhi so easily because the BJP can not trust him for next 8-9 months. The BJP can not either favour imposing President's Rule because that would give Nitish some sympathy. It cannot support suspended animation state of assembly for it is, in all probability, about to witness the folly of the approach in Delhi. So, more than Nitish and Manjhi, the Bihar politics seems to be a litmus test the political acumen of the BJP.

Modi-fied: After the Victory

Ever since the triumph of Narendra Modi in May this year, there has been a sense of a different kind of ‘communalism’ among politicians, media and the populace. All kinds of remarks have been made which look funny but there are not. Concepts like All Indians Are Hindus, Hinduism is the character of India, Love Jihad, Madrasas are schools of terrorism, and latest revelation that slaughter houses are funding terrorism in India- they all have gained immense currency in Modified era.

To say that all Indians are Hindus could have been true in pre-medieval India but to preach such a theory in the second decade of 21st century is anything but the true reflection of India. The term Hindu originated as a territorial concept but in the last almost one millennium the term has acquired a religious connotation and to still link it with territory only would be negating India's history of past one thousand years during which we built monuments like red fort from the ramparts of which a proud Narendra Modi delivered his maiden Independence Day speech.

The word Hindu meant nothing to ancient or so to say to original Hindus. They thought it a corrupt version of Sindhu, which they worshipped as the giver of life and food. And, in that sense of term accepting and respecting the word Hindu would be an affront to the beliefs of the ancestors of India.

Secondly, Hindu refers to a region which is now beyond our control and in the past 67 years, we have come to the terms of this new reality. And, given the state of affairs of Pakistan, we are happy to see the land purged long ago. Meanwhile, the term itself has ceased to carry the territorial meaning and now it solely represents only one institutionalized religion. Interestingly, the precursor to Hinduism was not institutional and was essentially personal.

(In ancient India religious beliefs were considered to be personal. Buddha attempted to institutionalize it albeit for different purpose. It is altogether a different tale that Buddhism vanished from India. So, the greatest effort at institutionalizing religion failed in the country).

So, even on this count enforcing ‘Hindu’ would not be bringing ancient and traditional identity to the land and people as the concept is relatively new and came into existence in the last one thousand years, which the protagonists of Hindu are more than willing to wipe out from the landscape of everyone's memory.

In a slight deviation, it would not be inappropriate to talk of another theory of the so-called right wingers that the ancestors of Muslims were Hindus. It has two interesting facets. One, we know the term Hindu did not exist in India before the advent of Islam in India. They were happy with what they were. They didn't need any new identity. So, the very premise is wrongly worded. Secondly, it is wrong on the part of the Muslims to deny their ancestral link.

It is impossible to have the entire lot of Muslims migrating from other parts of the world into India. Long before the Muslims became rulers in various parts of India, there were enough Muslims in India and the belief had rooted itself in India- through traders and mendicants. This is why the general populace didn't revolt when Islamic intruders enforced their rule and belief. People were already acquainted with the new belief system. They didn't consider it foreign.

So, for the aam aadmi only rulers changed, as we saw in 1947. But, for some extremely illogical yet unknown reasons the Muslims, in general, don't admit that their ancestors belonged to this very land and changed their belief which offered them better terms of living in a highly stratified society. It is baffling why so many highly placed Muslims feel pride in tracing their ancestry to a land outside India.

These are complicated equations, which have been made more incomprehensible with the theory of Love Jihad. Jihad itself is being debated world over. And, most of the explanations of the term depend on the personality of the exponent and the side of the table s/he is sitting. The term Jihad no longer holds significance in a civilized society because it entails violence, physical or mental or both. May be, in the centuries gone by, it would carry some other meaning and perception. Modern reality of jihad is repulsive.

On the other hand, word ‘Love’ has undergone a metamorphosis in its meaning in the age of global village. Difference between lust and love has always been thin and now in the age of instant technological mindset, barriers are being broken, reported and known with greater frequency than ever before.

With identity by birth taking further deeper roots in general, the instances of trans-religious community love between two individuals can easily become an affront to any of the community-parties. Still, there could be motivated people out there to target susceptible individuals, generally girls because of the very nature of our society. So, whether it is trans-community love or target-love, which amounts to cheating, it is always girls, women who bear the brunt. A ruling dispensation should protect women instead of raising the bogey of concepts like love jihad.

Another point that is being vehemently made is that madarsas are preaching terrorism. There is none who would deny the role of preachers in spreading terrorism within India and without. One can listen to a few gatherings of preachers to get the sense of alienation and resultant hatred towards the rest.

Madarsas need to be modernized and brought under regular teaching curriculum. A regular course should be prescribed on the lines of CBSE and made the affiliated to the board. Madarsas should have the privilege to teach Quran and other Islamic religious text but only in addition to the regular courses. The same policy should be adopted for other religious institutions imparting education. So, the suggestion here is to turn Madarsas into schools with some religious privileges.  

Finally, to suggest that the slaughter houses are funding terrorism is ridiculous. The Minister in the Modi cabinet, who targeted slaughter houses, has been a champion of animal rights. Her objection on this count to the very existence of slaughter houses is understandable but linking them to terrorism smacks of communalism. India has a long history of slaughter houses Kautilyas Arthshastra prescribes for maintaining quality in the slaughter houses.

So, the union minister’s comment not only targets people engaged in this vocation but also serves to dissuade non-Muslims from taking meat trade, and thereby communalizing the entire business. This is preposterous. The Modi government would do well to focus on the cardinal rule of governance that the King's duty is to provide security and exact taxes in a benevolent rule. The sooner it does, the better it is.

Henderson-Brooks-Bhagat report: Is it a news?

The Henderson-Brooks-Bhagat report seemed to have the potential to create flutter in the highly fragile politics of India and even more brittle news TV. But, proving to be a rarity, the leaked news got only what it deserved. Perhaps, it deserved even less. 

That the 1962 war was a debacle for India is not doubted by anyone. Pt. Nehru was, theoretically, responsible for the loss of honour of the Indian nation is also not countered by anyone. Nehru himself admitted that he was wrong in his Chinese policy. So, Henderson-Brooks report was not at all a news and far less an expose. It was not worth a coverage except for the story about the timing of its leak.

We all know that what we present as leaked report is actually a willful act of making the chosen part of an information. It is not really a leak in strict sense of term. The leak is a mutually agreed sharing of information at some level. So, the only news-point in the leak was timing. 

One reason for the leak could have been giving a promo for the book to be released. The book is being released at a time when India is going to the polls and the first prime minister of the country happened to be of the party which is facing a huge anti-incumbency of ten years of sedate rule, which has more miss opportunities than achievements to its credit. The second possible reason behind the leak lies precisely here. It seemed to have been intended to gain some popularity in the politically surcharged India, especially when the parochial nationalist forces are fancying their chances.

But, then the entire episode has raised once again a valid question as to why the original report still remains extremely classifies document? Why did the defence minister say after 50 years of the war that the report could not be made public because it might have operational ramifications. Isn't it worrying that 50-year old flaws and loopholes have not been plugged successfully? 

Most of the defence experts believe that India of 2014 is not the India of 1962 though neither has China stagnated. But, that India would not suffer a similar humiliation is agreed to by all. Then, why have all the successive governments not dared to declassify the original report, after all we have now. as Congress vice-president says, right to information? These questions are valid ones and the reality pertaining to these questions defy all logic. And, perhaps this defiant ground reality causes an essentially non-news item occupy space in news media as prominently as it did.

Kejriwal Protest: Anarchy Or Campaign for 2014 Polls

A tug of war between the states and the centre is neither new nor uncommon nor unexpected but what happened in New Delhi was something definitely fresh for a student of politics in India. Even the Constitution makers were aware of the complexities and hence provided for a detailed layout for the Centre-State relationship. Despite that Ajoy Mukherjee of West Bengal and M Karunanidhi of Tamil Nadu sat on dharna while occupying the chair of the chief minster of the respective states. But, there is one notable difference between Kejriwal and the rest. That is, he runs government whose jurisdiction criss-crosses with that of the centre over the same territory. This is what precisely becomes the favourable ground for Kejriwalian brand of politics.

In the last ten years almost all the non-UPA chief ministers have accused the centre of adopting a biased attitude to their states. But, non of them sat on dharna for this. Petitions and letters were considered sufficient. But, then Arvind Kejriwal claims to bring a newness in Indian politics. True to his claim, Kejriwal has resorted to quite a few new tactics to push for his demands. The latest manifestation was his dharna at the Rail Bhawan in New Delhi.

Though his government is new and no judgement should be passed on Kejriwal government, it is clearly visible that he has found it more difficult than he might have imagined to run a government. This becomes more difficult for him because he promised almost everything under the sky and that too in a flash if he won the elections. Congress's defeat and support to AAP later propelled him into the chair of chief minister. But, even in the chair, he leads a pack of agitators not administrators. The biggest proof of this is that even the ministers ensure that media especially the TV media is there when they are out in the public. This clearly shows that they don't want to work without being noticed- a sign of credit hungry people- an aam aadmi trait. Performing one's duty under the PR lenses is not what is ideal for running a government.

Secondly, the Team Kejriwal thinks that it is the sole custodian of righteousness. Whatever Kejriwal says or does is right and everything else is incorrect and corrupt. They have went on to say that people in Congress and BJP are actually "pimps". One may have the right to claim whatever s/he wishes to but how can one justify labelling everyone else as despised. This can not be what they claim to be champions of, democracy.

The latest showdown-followed-by-climb-down episode emanated from the political expediency of Team Kejriwal for saving its face and its errant minister. There is no doubt that Kejriwal wanted to save his minister because he could not possibly have been so naive not to understand that what Somnath Bharti did was wrong and constituted a crime under the IPC provided he still believes in this code. He claimed that one of the reasons for his dharna was the rape of the Danish woman. But, I don't think we need to revisit his statement just after the incident came to the light. He was not at all forthcoming as to what should be done. But, when Somnath Bharti incident happened, he thought of exploiting the situation for his benefit.

There is no denying that Kejriwal does not find his job a cakewalk and also knows that after six months there is any guarantee for its longevity. He has to achieve at least two objective before the candle goes off. One, to showcase a couple of populist decisions- water and electricity have done a part of it for his followers, though critics may disagree. Second, to gain sympathy which may help him in the Lok Sabha polls. So, his nationally televised showdown-followed-by-climb-down dharna was perfectly designed for the Lok Sabha polls while his managers were touring the nation. The dharna also proved that he has mastered the art of camouflaging. He proclaimed victory and made even many of journalists to believe that the Centre knelt down before the might of Kejriwal, while he knew that he was pushed to the wall. So, in his retreat he announced victory! 

Boxing Day Judgement: Snooping noose and riot relief for Modi

December 26- the boxing day seems to have put BJP’s prime ministerial candidate into a boxing ring like situation, where he gets one punch in his face while the other one got deflected at the Ahmedabad metropolitan court. The Centre decided to set up an inquiry commission to probe the snooping scandal involving a certain ‘Saheb’, who is yet to be identified but widely believed to be the Gujarat CM. The Centre’s move is clearly set to damage Modi’s credentials drawing furuious reactions from the BJP, which has vowed to challenge the Union Cabinet’s decision saying that it violates the federal scheme of India provided in the Constitution.

So, while Modi seems to be heading to the Congress’s trap in snooping case, he has got a big reprieve in one of the 2002 Gujarat riots cases. The metropolitan court has given a clean chit to Modi in the Gulbarg Society massacre case accepting the Supreme Court appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT). Notwithstanding this clean chit, Modi has a long way to go before he could have a similar clean chit from the minority community especially the muslims. The perception is not bound by a court verdict and the perception is very strong in 2002 riot cases that Modi did not follow, what Atal Bihari Vajpayee called, ‘Rajdharma’. This perception can be compared with 1984 riots and Congress’s (Rajiv Gandhi’s, to be precise) image. Taint can’t be wiped out, but can’t be let to inflict further damage.

However, Modi supporters have got a good point to defend the BJP’s PM candidate in TV debates. But, even the ardent supporter of Modi would not deny that whatever Modi did by commission or omission during 2002 riots was right. It is impossible to fathom that a few groups of ruffians tailor-made for communal violence can kill so many people including a parliamentarian with a strong willed government present in a state. People running the government must have had a role to play directly or indirectly. If Congress governments are held responsible for 1984 and 1986 riots, how could Modi’s government be an exception in the case of 2002 riots.

Many close to Modi give him the benefit of doubt for being too new in the chair when the riots took place in Gujarat arguing that he was yet not at the helm of affairs of administration there. They also believe that when riots broke out, Modi developed cold feet as he was caught unprepared to deal with the situation. However, it is beyond the realm of logic as to why Modi did not issue a clear cut instruction to the police and civil administration that steps should be taken to esnure that no communal violence took place in Gujarat. Also, why did not Modi ask organizations like Bajrang Dal and Vishwa Hindu Parishad, which are very close to BJP, to ensure that communal fabric is not disturbed and the muslims are not harmed in the aftermath of Godhra massacre. In any case micro-management of administration was not the responsibility of the Chief Minister.

Further, why did not Modi show any urgency in ensuring justice to the victims and bringing perpetrators to justice? Why did not Modi took immediate steps to allay fears among the muslims and affected hindus? Such questions are serious and pose a big challenge to Modi’s popularity and his claim for the top job in the country. 

Sachin Tendulkar and his time

So many things are being written these days about Sachin Tendunlkar, who has just played his last domestic first class match and is about to hang his boots. But, whatever is being written about him seems to be less when compared to the adulation Sachin has got all through his career and a kind of revolution that he ushered in not just around cricket in India but other sports as well.

Sachin arrived on the international scene at a time when India, the Elephant, was still sleeping and when India’s gold was about to be mortgaged to run the finances of the nation, Mandal was yet to give voice to long suppressed sections of society and divide the same along a new fault-line, flagrant display of communalism was yet to become the order of the day, Vishwanath Pratap Singh was the prime minister, Rajiv Gandhi was still struggling to wash off the Bofors taint, Amitabh Bachchan had gone back to where he came from and was being challenged by rising Anil Kapoor, Khalistan terrorism was about to give way to Kashmiri terrorism; in nutshell, India was still an innocent nation and Sachin emerged the first teen sensation on the Indian scene (albeit after Rishi Kapoor) and soon engulfed the imagination of every aspiring Indian from a humble background.

Sachin made his test debut in a match which was also the first for Waqar Younis, who finally got him at 15, clean bowled. The test series was pretty ordinary for records except for the fact that Sachin was just 16 and looked even younger. What propelled Sachin into everyone’s imagination was his heroic effort in a match, which was officially called off but played for the spectators. India required 43 runs off the last two overs to be bowled by one of the greatest leg spinners of all time, now forgotten, Abdul Qadir and arguably the best left arm fast bowler Wasim Akram.

In Qadir’s over Sachin showed what he was going to do to the pride of the bowlers in the next two-and-a-half decades. Just a while before Qadir’s over Sachin had hit two consecutive sixes off Mustaq Ahmad - another great leg spinner and almost a replica of Qadir - and faced one ball from Qadir for a single. Qadir reportedly challenged Sachin by asking him to hit him out of the park, to which the boy replied by acknowledging the leg spinner’s greatness.

But, there was bloodbath on the cricket field the next over. The first three balls of Qadir went for sixes and the over ended with Sachin plundering 27 runs off it. The boy had turned into a formidable man. This over signalled that India can dominate Pakistan. This also meant that India’s pride was restored despite the fact that India lost that match. There could be a match on with Pakistan. This one over changed the way Indian cricket was looked upon.

For years, Sachin came at number 5 or 6 and scored a quick-fire 30s, 40s and occasionally 50s to give India a hope and restore pride. Then in 1994, came the big moment at Auckland against New Zealand, when Sachin opened the innings and tore apart the Kiwi’s attack. Rest is history.

What Sachin did essentially brought the young achievers from all walks of life into the focus of a young nation. Suddenly, there was Vishwanathan Anand in recognition; there was a Leander Paes, a Limba Ram, a Kambli, a Shah Rukh Khan and opening up of India to new economic, social and somewhat politicking ideas. Also, there were defeats, surrender down under, riots, new form of terrorism and no-hold-barred facets of society. 

The Age of Innocence was lost. 

But, the innocent boy travelled like a stream well aware of its path and destination. Surely, Sachin has reached his ocean and formed the biggest delta on the end plain of sports and sportsmanship. More powerful streams may still come down to oceans but such a huge delta may never be surpassed.